A culture teaches people what to value through the people it rewards. America’s long admiration for clever money-making reveals how dishonesty becomes normal and honesty starts to feel like a disadvantage.

Success can become its own justification, even when it’s achieved through dishonest means. A clever scammer is sometimes met with begrudging respect. We think to ourselves, “They knew how the system worked and used it to their advantage.” Or we blame the victim and say, “Other people were foolish enough to fall for it. That’s their problem. I would’ve known better!”

This general attitude has existed for a long time. Writing about his visit to America in 1842, Charles Dickens describes the admiration for dishonest money-making that still feels familiar today:

Another prominent feature is the love of ‘smart’ dealing: which gilds over many a swindle and gross breach of trust; many a defalcation, public and private; and enables many a knave to hold his head up with the best, who well deserves a halter; though it has not been without its retributive operation, for this smartness has done more in a few years to impair the public credit, and to cripple the public resources, than dull honesty, however rash, could have effected in a century. The merits of a broken speculation, or a bankruptcy, or of a successful scoundrel, are not gauged by its or his observance of the golden rule, ‘Do as you would be done by,’ but are considered with reference to their smartness.

I recollect, on both occasions of our passing that ill-fated Cairo on the Mississippi, remarking on the bad effects such gross deceits must have when they exploded, in generating a want of confidence abroad, and discouraging foreign investment: but I was given to understand that this was a very smart scheme by which a deal of money had been made: and that its smartest feature was, that they forgot these things abroad, in a very short time, and speculated again, as freely as ever.

The following dialogue I have held a hundred times:

“Is it not a very disgraceful circumstance that such a man as So-and-so should be acquiring a large property by the most infamous and odious means, and notwithstanding all the crimes of which he has been guilty, should be tolerated and abetted by your Citizens? He is a public nuisance, is he not?”

“Yes, sir.”

“A convicted liar?”

“Yes, sir.”

“He has been kicked, and cuffed, and caned?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And he is utterly dishonourable, debased, and profligate?”

“Yes, sir.”

“In the name of wonder, then, what is his merit?”

“Well, sir, he is a smart man.”

The alarming thing about this exchange is that everyone knows the man is dishonest, but they admire him anyway. His ability to manipulate others becomes a mark of intelligence and worthiness. “He’s willing to do anything to succeed. He’s cutthroat. He always finds a way to come out on top.”

Once this type of ruthlessness becomes something to look up to, honesty starts looking like naivety and weakness. Good-natured people can be especially vulnerable in low-trust societies where taking advantage of others is treated as normal.

Dickens also observed that Americans could sometimes even take pride in their distrust, treating it as proof of their shrewdness and ability to see through a con. Being suspicious of everyone becomes a badge of sophistication, while trusting others makes you look like a fool.

The scammer’s success and wealth become visible to all, often seen as proof of their inherent value. The pain caused to others fades into the background, and the victims become a footnote in another American success story. Culture praises the winner and scorns the loser, reinforcing the just-world fallacy: the belief that people always get what they deserve.

This worship of money-making has a long history in America. Some of this may trace back to its Protestant roots. Sociologist Max Weber argued that certain Protestant traditions treated material success through disciplined work as a sign of God’s blessing. This association between wealth and morality may have continued into the present day, while shedding its religious garb and placing less emphasis on how the money was earned. The bank account becomes the proof.

What happens when getting ahead becomes more important than how you get ahead?

In this competitive environment, people begin to justify their own dishonesty by thinking, “If I don’t take advantage of others, someone will take advantage of me. This is just how the world works.” The same zero-sum outlook can also encourage a crab bucket mentality, where people feel they need to bring others down to rise up themselves.

This attitude can show up among billionaires as well as everyday Americans, from phone scammers targeting someone’s grandmother to promoters running crypto pump-and-dumps.

In a modern echo of Dickens’s dialogue, one commenter in a 2022 BlackHatWorld thread asks, “Isn’t Andrew Tate a Scam?” and someone replies, “well he made a shitload of money from his webcam business. men lie. women lie. numbers dont.” In a materialistic world, money becomes the ultimate arbiter of someone’s value.

When wealth is treated as proof of someone’s worth, we can feel compelled to copy the same tactics they used, even when they cross our own moral lines. This becomes part of our map of reality. We just assume this is how success always looks. “All money-making requires getting a little dirty.”

Why worry about treating people fairly if you are only respected for your wealth? The person who refuses to exploit others starts to look like someone who is gullible or simply doesn’t understand the game. That perspective lowers trust and teaches people to treat ordinary dealings as contests. Dishonesty starts to feel like a prerequisite for survival.

It’s hard to simply tell people to be more honest and fair when we live in a world that incentivizes dishonesty. When people are struggling to meet basic economic needs, a little grift here and there can feel like a normal part of modern American life. We begin to think, “Our leaders do it, so why shouldn’t we?” We grant ourselves the moral license to take part.

Everyday grifting can mean anything from selling miracle cures or supplements with unsubstantiated health claims to exaggerating what beauty products or “looksmaxxing” advice can do. It can also include buying fake followers to seem more popular on social media, promoting gambling apps as a route to easy money, or recruiting friends and neighbors into MLM schemes with false promises of a lucrative side hustle.

The American Dream promises that every citizen can earn a living, buy a home, and raise a family. But even when people no longer believe this dream is attainable, they can still feel entitled to the life they were promised. When honest work seems unlikely to get them there, “whatever it takes” can start to feel morally justified. These moral compromises – small and large – become ordinary ways of getting ahead.

Every time we admire someone’s success while looking the other way at dishonesty and unethical behavior, we help create an environment where scams, frauds, and grifts become normalized. In that ecosystem, people learn to expect deception and treat their own honesty as a weakness. It’s wise to stay guarded in such an environment, but we have to be careful not to let it swallow us whole and change who we are.

The post Grifters, Fraudsters, and the American Worship of “Smart” Dealing appeared first on The Emotion Machine.

Following local news can make your community feel more familiar and give you more reasons to get involved. Learn to pay more attention to what’s happening closer to home.

When’s the last time you checked your local news? In today’s media landscape, you can know every detail of a national controversy while barely knowing what happened two blocks away.

Local news may seem like an old-fashioned source of information, but it can actually play a key role in keeping you connected to your community.

One recent study published in the Journal of Communication found a link between local news and lower reports of loneliness. At the state level, places with fewer local news options reported higher loneliness. In a national survey, the researchers also found that people who rarely followed local news reported more loneliness than those who followed it more regularly.

While these findings are correlations, they hint that shared local information may influence how connected people feel to their neighborhoods. As community ties dwindle and people become more likely to hunker down, local news makes the abstract notion of “community” more visible and tangible.

One function of local news is learning about events that you can actually show up to. Without it, you might miss that free concert in the park, a new neighborhood book club, or that holiday fair on Main Street.

Even when you’re not showing up somewhere, local news can still foster a sense of belonging by keeping you in touch with the people and stories in your hometown. A story about a local musician finding success or a high school team winning a championship can inspire community pride. You may never meet those people, but knowing their stories can make you feel part of a shared world. Following these local news stories gives you shared reference points with your neighbors, making it easier to find common topics to talk about and bond over.

In a 2001 study, researcher Clyde Bentley contacted subscribers after they reported a missing newspaper. He found that subscribers missed more than the information itself. They also missed the emotional connection the paper provided: it kept them tethered to their community through local stories, obituaries, and even news that tuna was on sale at the market. One 80-year-old woman remarked, “We look forward to the paper coming. It’s kind of like a friend or neighbor coming in.”

Where to Find Local News and Community Information

Your local newspaper or TV station is a good place to start if they are still available to you. Even just checking in for a few minutes every morning can give you a better sense of what’s going on in your community that week and what weather to expect. You can also check their websites or look for other online local news outlets like Patch, where residents can also share news and events.

In addition to news sources, neighborhood groups on Facebook or Nextdoor can give you a more grassroots sense of what is going on in your community. Places like this serve as an online town bulletin board, where people can post various things from free furniture and lost dogs to local gigs and odd jobs. Keep in mind that these feeds can also attract rumors, gossip, and drama, so be selective about which groups you follow and how you participate in them.

Event listings and community calendars are a useful way to find things to do nearby. Meetup is one helpful site for finding groups and activities with shared interests, like a local book club or archery class. And Eventbrite is a great way to find listings for local music shows, festivals, and open-mic nights.

Once you plug more into your community, you’ll likely find better sources to follow, but these are a solid starting point.

Try building a local news feed of your own that you can check in with regularly. Consider a mix of one local outlet, one neighborhood feed, and one events calendar.

What is one community source you could start following this week?

The post How to Use Local News to Plug Back Into Your Community appeared first on The Emotion Machine.

Low trust can deepen atomization, making everyday connection feel like more effort than it’s worth and retreating into our own homes the easier choice.

What causes us to want to stay inside and not socialize? One often overlooked factor is the culture and social environment around us.

With the ongoing disintegration of the community, many of us barely know our neighbors. Staying home to watch TV just feels easier than inviting a neighbor over.

Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam is known for his research on social capital: the networks of relationships and habits of trust and reciprocity that help people cooperate. His work documents a broad decline in American community ties beginning in the late 1960s.

His famous book Bowling Alone takes its title from fewer people joining bowling leagues, but it traces a wider decline in community participation, including voting in elections, attending PTA meetings, and going to church.

Screens offer an easy place to retreat, but they are not the only reason we stay inside. Putnam’s earlier work considered mobility and urban sprawl, changes in family structure, and technology and mass media as possible contributors to this trend. In a 2007 paper, he turned to another factor: the demographic composition of our neighborhoods.

Putnam compared how much people trusted their neighbors across American communities with how ethnically mixed their neighborhoods were. Here’s what he found:

Farther right means more ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods; higher up means a greater share of residents said they trust their neighbors “a lot.” The graph shows a correlation, and the association remained in Putnam’s separate analysis after accounting for poverty, crime rates, residents’ age, income, education, and other personal and local differences.

In Los Angeles and San Francisco, about 30 percent of respondents said they trusted their neighbors “a lot.” In Bismarck, North Dakota, it was nearly 70 percent.

The surprising part is that this wasn’t a simple “us versus them” pattern. People in more diverse communities reported less trust even in their own group.

A general distrust of our neighbors can lead us to pull back from community life and “hunker down” at home. As Putnam puts it, “Diversity, at least in the short run, seems to bring out the turtle in all of us.”

Life in a Low-Trust Neighborhood

The differences between high trust and low trust neighborhoods show up in everyday life in many ways, from lending a tool to a neighbor to feeling comfortable leaving your door unlocked at night.

People in high trust neighborhoods are more cooperative and invested in their community. They not only say hi to each other, but also collect mail for a neighbor who’s away for the weekend, arrange carpools for their children, and join neighborhood cleanups after a storm.

That cooperation can improve the neighborhood itself, from getting potholes fixed to maintaining local playgrounds. Even people who don’t socialize much can benefit from living in a high trust community, where neighbors look out for one another, help keep sidewalks and shared spaces clean, and take part in neighborhood watch programs.

In contrast, people in low trust neighborhoods tend to be more individualistic. They are less willing to offer help, exchange favors, reach out to neighbors, or participate in community activities.

Over time, people can start asking, “Why bother?” It feels easier to hunker down in your personal silo than to make the effort to connect with a neighbor. That withdrawal can feed on itself: the more people pull back, the fewer opportunities everyone has to connect. This is how atomization takes hold: many people can live near one another while feeling increasingly disconnected.

Putnam’s findings went beyond trust in neighbors. People in more diverse communities also reported fewer close friends and confidants, were less likely to volunteer or work on community projects, and spent more time watching television.

One great illustration of why social trust matters is the lost-letter thought experiment. Imagine addressed, stamped envelopes containing money are dropped around town. How many would reach their intended recipients with the money still inside? How many people would simply keep the money for themselves?

Your answer will say a lot about how much you trust the people in your own neighborhood.

It probably doesn’t help that Americans can expect to move roughly 12 times over their lives, according to a Census Bureau estimate based on 2007 data. Moving to a new neighborhood often means starting over socially, making it harder to establish roots and build long-term social connections.

Bonding vs. Bridging: Why Connection Takes Work

In a 2001 paper titled Birds of a Feather, researchers describe how people are more likely to form bonds with those who are similar to them. This pattern, known as homophily, appears across many types of relationships, including marriage, friendship, workplace connections, and social support networks. The researchers also note that ties between dissimilar people tend to dissolve more often.

This is a natural pattern, but it can also limit our ability to connect with people outside our social bubble.

Putnam distinguishes between two types of social capital: bonding and bridging. Bonding often happens among family, close friends, and people who share our background or outlook. This shared understanding reduces the work of connecting.

Bridging often requires extra effort. It involves forming relationships with people who are different from us, often extending our social connections beyond our immediate circle of empathy. Bridging is especially important in civic engagement and political activism, where people with very different backgrounds and views need to find common ground and work toward a shared goal.

Sports leagues, events at local parks, and neighborhood cleanups can create opportunities for bridging. However, these activities need organizers to get them started, which can be even harder in neighborhoods where trust is already low.

In theory, bridging can help diverse communities pull together and build social capital over time. Putnam argues that the initial “hunker down” response can be overcome as people develop shared identities and stronger connections. His study compared communities at one point in time, so it couldn’t establish whether those same communities would become more trusting over the years.

Unfortunately, it’s still unclear whether Putnam’s optimistic projections for the future will come true. A later 2020 meta-analysis of 87 studies also found a modest overall negative association between ethnic diversity and social trust, strongest for trust in neighbors. Whether that association diminishes over time remains an open question.

And the continuing decline in social capital makes rebuilding these connections even more challenging. As Putnam has emphasized in his recent interviews, things have only gotten worse.

If you find yourself wanting to hunker down, it isn’t necessarily a personal failing. Your social environment can make reaching out feel like more effort than it’s worth, even when you want to connect. People are more likely to come out of their shells when they believe someone will meet them halfway. But someone has to make the first move.

The post Hunker Down: Atomization and the Retreat from Social Life appeared first on The Emotion Machine.

Family roots are more than genealogy. An old photograph or familiar family story can change how we see our own lives. Connecting with those roots helps us understand where we belong and what we want to carry forward.

Family roots can be underappreciated in a society that overemphasizes individualism and independence.

We are encouraged to think of ourselves as self-made, free to construct an identity from scratch. Yet every life begins within a history already in motion. Family shapes us long before we consciously decide who we want to become. We inherit traditions and stories that began before we were born.

As a good American, I learned to associate success and freedom with breaking away from family, religion, and community — including leaving your hometown and defining yourself on your own terms. Learning to care more about family, ancestry, and history has been an ongoing paradigm shift in my thinking.

Recently I’ve been spending more time with my grandma. She has dementia, so we’ve been doing simple things together like looking through old photographs and listening to classical music.

Photo albums are one of the simplest ways to keep family connections alive across generations. My grandma lost both of her brothers early in her life. One of them died while serving as a pilot in the Pacific during World War II. I never got to meet them, but old photographs give me a glimpse of who they were and reveal parts of my grandma’s life that existed before me. They help me understand more about her and where I come from.

These family roots are deep inputs that can influence us even when we are unaware of them. They reach us in several ways that often intertwine:

Experiences We Share

Family roots start with everyday experiences and the memories we build over time.

The classic family dinner at the end of the day is one example. Everyone gathers, eats, and catches up on each other’s lives. For many families, this is the only time everyone is together. Rituals like these help strengthen family ties and build a shared sense of belonging.

Other core family memories follow us through life, such as summer vacations, holidays with relatives, birthdays, and graduations. One memory that will always stick with me is going on a family road trip in a rented car and being able to see the Grand Canyon, Bryce Canyon, and Yosemite National Park. Shared moments like these can define chapters in our lives and become part of our larger story.

Belonging often starts with the experiences we share within our family, community, or tribe, and that connection can then extend to a more distant lineage.

Lives We Learn About

Family roots also connect us with lives and experiences we’ve never witnessed ourselves.

Sitting down with an old family photo album gives us a peek into how earlier generations lived, how they dressed, how they spent their time, and what they did for fun. Older relatives can tell us the stories behind these photographs and share their own memories of family members we never had the chance to meet. In this way, the lived experiences of older relatives become part of a family’s oral history that gets passed down.

Other family artifacts, like letters, newspaper clippings, home videos, diaries, or keepsakes, can connect us to a particular time and place. An heirloom like a ring, handmade quilt, military medal, or old instrument can become a symbol of family continuity as it passes from one generation to the next. Knowing whose it was can make that connection feel more personal and meaningful.

These memories aren’t just for reminiscing. Old family stories can open up deeper conversations about ourselves. In a 2026 study, researchers found that wartime stories passed down within families can become powerful reference points that help guide our choices in the present. In related work by the same researchers, one mother described a meaningful conversation with her son that began with their family history:

“Yesterday, my son and I took the time to discuss our family history. First of all, I was able to tell him what I know about my mother’s and grandfather’s history. Then, for several hours, beyond the questions he was asking, we shared our thoughts on the values that drive us, on life’s paths, mine, his, the family’s, what guides our choices, how to build ourselves as men and women, what makes us who we are, who are the ones who play a decisive role in our lives and why… It was a very rich encounter!”

Culture, History, and Tradition

The family is one of the first places where personal life intersects with wider culture, history, and tradition.

Religion and politics often first reach us through family life. Religious beliefs can take shape through the holidays we celebrate as children or going to church every Sunday. We also pick up political beliefs from family conversations about elections or the way our relatives tend to vote. And a family history of military service or political office can shape our ideas about what role we play in our country.

Ethnic heritage can also be an important part of family life. A family name or the language spoken at home can keep us connected to an ancestral homeland. Traditional recipes, dances, and clothing can keep that heritage alive in modern family life, even generations after a family has migrated.

Putting together a simple family tree can make those connections more concrete, showing where earlier generations lived and which parts of their stories you could dive into further. Ancestry websites can help you find historical records and fill in the details.

Family roots can also give us a personal connection to larger historical events. Learning that an ancestor sailed on the Mayflower or that a relative lived through the Great Depression can make those chapters of history feel closer, as part of our family’s story as well as the nation’s.

Why Family Roots Matter

• Identity: Family roots help us understand where we come from. They give us a longer view of ourselves — who and what shaped us over time — and help us recognize traits, values, sensitivities, or interests that may run through our family.
• Belonging: Shared memories and traditions situate us within a family and a wider community. They give us something meaningful in common and connect us across generations.
• Reference Points: Family roots can provide examples, warnings, possibilities, and practical wisdom that help guide our present choices. They can also inspire and motivate us.

Roots tell us what past we belong to. Reference points help us decide what to do with it.

Passing the Torch

Recognizing the past also turns us toward the future: What will we pass down that lives on after we pass away?

Some family stories survive only because someone within the family remembers and cares enough to share them. Textbooks and documentaries can teach us about the past, but they cannot preserve every family’s story and experience.

Long before the printing press, people passed down stories, lessons, and myths by word of mouth. A conversation over an old photo album is part of this same tradition.

What family stories will you pass along? What new ones will you create for others to tell?

The post Connecting With Family Roots appeared first on The Emotion Machine.

News has expanded far beyond traditional journalism, with bedroom monologues, comedy podcasts, and social media posts changing what people recognize as legitimate “news.”

With the rise of digital media, the boundaries of what counts as “news” have become increasingly blurred.

According to a 2026 report by the Reuters Institute, roughly 75% of respondents across six countries still retain a “traditional core” definition of news centered on newspapers, television, radio, and dedicated news websites.

But that figure contains an important divide: 49% hold a predominantly traditional definition, while another 26% combine that core with newer sources and formats such as social media, podcasts, short-form video, and AI chatbots.

The report examines what respondents counted as “news” across five key dimensions:

1. Topic: What is it about?
Politics, the economy, military conflicts, and climate change are widely recognized as news, while sports, entertainment, gaming, and fashion are more contested in their “newsiness.” For topics at the edges, the distinction often depends on personal interest and perceived relevance.

2. Source: Where did we encounter it?
A television news report or dedicated news website is clearly labeled as news. Newer channels such as social media, podcasts, and AI chatbots can mix, repackage, or relay news without clearly separating it from other content—or identifying where it originally came from.

3. Actor: Who presented it?
Journalists, experts, and public officials remain at the traditional core, but creators, influencers, activists, celebrities, and ordinary people can now report on and interpret current events.

4. Genre: What kind of information is it?
Reporting and investigations are readily recognized as news, while commentary, debate, satire, and comedy blur the boundaries between information, interpretation, and entertainment.

5. Format: How is it delivered?
An evening TV news program, a detailed written article, or a quick news update on the radio fit familiar expectations of news. Expanded definitions also include short TikTok clips, brief written posts, and long podcast conversations.

These are useful dimensions for understanding what people consider news, but they can combine in many different ways. A journalist can publish a verified report through a short TikTok video, while an influencer can discuss a military conflict on a comedy podcast.

News presents itself in many different contexts, which is one big reason our current information landscape can be so hard to navigate.

The Blurring of Information and Entertainment

The expanding definition of “news” touches on the growing overlap between information and entertainment.

Interviews and debates are still recognized as common forms of news, but things get fuzzier with opinion, commentary, and satire. A podcast host can mix factual updates with personal reactions, an influencer can post a funny meme about the latest scandal, and a comedian can explain a political controversy while making jokes about it. This blending of information and entertainment is commonly called infotainment.

Treating something as “just entertainment” can give us a reason to let our guard down. We may laugh at a joke without questioning the assumptions behind it because “it’s just a joke,” so we feel no need to analyze it further. But these interpretations of current events can still seep in and shape our map of reality over time.

So even when we don’t consider something “news,” it can still influence how we interpret the news.

Relatability, Trust, and the “Bedroom Effect”

People don’t just consume content for fun. We also form parasocial bonds with creators and commentators, which makes it feel like we are receiving the news through trustworthy and likable friends. This personal connection can make their interpretations of current events feel more relatable and more credible than the same interpretations delivered by a prestigious but more distant institution.

One participant in the Reuters Institute report described the appeal of these more relatable presenters:

“Relatability is like talking about stuff that affects lots of people as well … I could relate to a certain person because they’re delivering the news [from] a regular apartment, you know, they have regular clothes … The expensive anchor that’s been there for 15 years, they want to seem relatable when they’re talking about the economy, but it’s just something cringey about watching a millionaire talk about the economy when there’s nothing to relate there.” – Adrian, USA, 33

A bedroom or ordinary apartment can appear more authentic than an expensive studio, especially to audiences already skeptical of mainstream institutions. This “bedroom effect” can also be deliberately cultivated. Researchers have described a conscious strategy known as calibrated amateurism: the deliberate production of content that looks raw, spontaneous, and unfiltered, even when there may be a lot of professional effort, time, and money going into it.

The rise of independent, personal content creation can introduce people to new ideas and perspectives that mainstream sources overlook. But it also risks spreading misinformation and information pollution when creators lack formal editorial oversight. Feeling familiar with someone doesn’t tell us how carefully they’ve checked what they’re saying, even though research suggests we’re more likely to trust familiar personalities.

We also risk falling into an “influencer silo,” where one favorite personality becomes our main filter for which stories matter and how to interpret them, and we end up tuning out all other perspectives and opinions.

The Manipulation of Hard Facts

One defining feature of news for most people is the expectation that it be grounded in facts and evidence.

Evidence still has to be interpreted though, and someone can report all the facts correctly while drawing a completely wrong conclusion. Statistics are a common example: numbers may be technically accurate and carry an aura of objectivity while still creating a misleading picture when presented without the right context.

Videos and photographs often feel like hard evidence that can’t be ignored, but even these can be presented out of context, paired with misleading headlines, or used to support bogus body language analysis.

One common example of this is someone freezing a specific frame in a video, then drawing a bunch of circles or lines around a facial expression or gesture, and treating it as incontrovertible proof of someone’s deeper motives or intentions. This kind of armchair psychoanalysis often goes far beyond what the footage actually shows. We don’t necessarily know how someone ‘should’ act in a highly stressful situation; the hot/cold empathy gap demonstrates how we can even misjudge how we ourselves would react under that pressure.

From Information to Understanding

Much of the Better Inputs project is focused on how to navigate this messy world of information.

One helpful guide is the Information Pyramid, which shows how to quickly evaluate various types of information you receive throughout the day, from rumors and social media posts to documentaries and scientific research.

A general habit of double-checking important claims is the bare minimum in today’s information environment. No source should be taken completely for granted. Trusted media institutions, popular influencers, scientific papers, and AI chatbots can all make mistakes, omit context, or mischaracterize what the evidence actually shows.

The goal isn’t to distrust everything, but to know when to slow down, look closer, and decide how new information fits into our broader understanding of the world.

The post Infotainment and the Expanding Definition of News appeared first on The Emotion Machine.