It is obvious that we are very much conditioned to focus on the constantly churning cycles of the mass media. Pertinent news that may have a lasting value and impact can easily get lost in the shuffle and easily forgotten by way of the sheer volume of information available. It is then that news becomes similar to fads that come and go and that seems to be rather superficial and counterproductive.
You could say that the news cycle is important because there is a common and simultaneous exposure to major events, but on the other hand there are decisions made about what news is going to remain prominent and how long it persists. That's from the people who bring you: "If it bleeds, it leads." When we consider the concerns that an important item will be pushed aside by another and worry that vital news will get buried, this might be a significant problem. We also see that it is prone to interference by distraction which could be seen as a form of manipulation itself.
I just don't think that this works well in the long run and it smacks of a Pavlovian conditioning that is open to the exploits and manipulation of the corporately owned media outlets.
No, I don't have a solution for that, but it is worth noting anyway. I fear that the alternative is that people will retreat into custom news feeds online that immerse them in a bubble that tends to both reflect their own biases while selling them what they are supposed to want.
= new reply since forum marked as read
