#journalits | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

redwineconversation · 1 month

Text

SL Benfica - Olympique Lyonnais OLPlay Postgame Interviews

Blah blah standard disclaimers apply; @OL Comms you have no idea how much I need a medicine ball from Starbucks right now, pls do the right thing and chip in; banning stans from stadiums would solve a lot of problems real quick; Paul Wheeler was right about you; y'all know the speech by now.

As always, this is a Timothee Piron and Coralie Ducher fan blog first, and everything else second.

Apart from banning stans from stadiums - which I honestly do believe would make football a better place-, I really wish that those who don't watch Lyon would shut the fuck up and stop opining about things they know nothing about.

OLYMPIQUE LYONNAIS OLPLAY POSTGAME INTERVIEWS

DELPHINE CASCARINO OLPLAY POSTGAME INTERVIEW

Cascarino: Yes, it's true that it was a very, very difficult first half. We conceded a goal, we scared ourselves, we even almost conceded a second goal. So in the second half we really need to regain our focus to be able to win this game, and that's what we did. We really mobilized ourselves and we were able to score that equalizing goal, and then the second goal. But it's true that it wasn't easy and, yeah. It was a close game.

Journalit: Delphine, we obviously want to know - we want to know everything, but what was said in the locker room at half time? How did you course correct after such an overall disastrous first half?

Cascarino: Obviously we got bitch-slapped. And we deserved it. We weren't giving it our all. We conceded that goal against a team within our reach. We knew it. We knew they would give everything in this game. And yeah, we gave ourselves a fright. But Sonia [Bompastor] also had some positive words to really give us confidence to regain control of the game. And that's what we did in the second half.

Journalist: And Delphine, we're obviously really happy you for having found the back of the net again for the first time after this long injury. We can imagine in terms of confidence and morale, and for the team, too, it's excellent news.

Cascarino: Obviously it feels good to have scored again after such a long time. A long time out. So yeah, I'm really happy to have helped the team win tonight and I hope there will be more.

Journalist: Another thing. We remember the quarterfinal last year, with the defeat against Chelsea. It obviously wasn't the best disposition for the semi-finals. The away game as well, I imagine it's now ingrained in your memory. It really left a mark on Lyon's season last year. It must be important for you to approach the return leg of this quarterfinal in different conditions.

Cascarino: Yeah, it's true that what happened last year was really hard to swallow, as the expression goes. It was really hard not making it past the quarterfinals. We played against a really, really strong team. But despite everything we had come back at the end of the game. We were robbed in the last minute of the game. But those - those are things that can happen. Today we're ahead in this quarterfinal, so we're going to try and keep that advantage.

Timothee Piron: I know it's not always easy in the heat of the moment, especially when the game just ended. Do you have a theory as to why the first half didn't go the way you wanted? Do you know what wasn't working in the first 45 minutes?

Cascarino: I think that in the first half, we were lacking in intensity, and especially in technical efficiency. We had to raise the bar in terms of technical efficiency in the second half to be able to win the game, because it's really what we were missing in the first half.

Coralie Ducher: Hello, Delphine. We felt you were more at ease once you switched over to the left side. You were coming up short against [Christy] Ucheibe. What was your analysis from the field?

Cascarino: Yeah, it's true it was a real fight on the right side. And at the end of the first half I was on the left side, and it worked out pretty well for me. So in the second half I was playing on the left. But I felt good on both sides, even if it's true that I made more of an impact on the left.

Journalist: Thank you, Delphine. One more question. Do you have a message maybe? It was important to see such a renown stadium welcome these two teams. From the studio here in Lyon, it looked incredible. Do you have a message for the Lyon supporters? It will be important to have them behind you next Wednesday.

Cascarino: Yeah, it was really wonderful to play in this beautiful stadium in front of this great crowd. It was really nice to see. We're eager to see the same but better at Groupama Stadium.

Journalist: Thank you, Delphine, and congratulations again for your goal. Have a safe trip back to Lyon, we are looking forward to seeing you.

CHRISTIANE ENDLER OLPLAY POSTGAME INTERVIEW

Journalist: Christiane, thank you for being here with us. Congratulations. It was a quarterfinal game in the UWCL. We know those can be complicated games. How did you experience it from inside the goal after a rather disastrous first half?

Endler: Good everyone to everyone. Yes, it was a difficult game. A Champions League game is never easy, we know it'a different, that we have to give everything. Maybe we didn't start the game well. I think we could do much better, especially technically. We were committing too many careless errors tonight. We have to improve for the second game. It's good to have the win but we're not too happy.

Journalist: Is that not the importance of a team, this strength of character? We know that Benfica was playing their first ever quarterfinal [in the UWCL]. Lyon has already played 15. Is that one of Lyon's strengths this year?

Endler: Yes, of course. Of course it's one of Lyon's strengths. We have experience, we have character. We show that we want to win even if sometimes we don't play that well. We have the will to go get the win in every game. We can improve as well in our finishing. I think, especially in the second half, we were lacking efficiency but it's going to come. It's going to come. We're confident for the next game.

Journalist: Thank you very much, Christiane. I know you're in a bit of a rush to catch the flight. So thank you for speaking to us at OLPlay and we hope to see you soon. Have a safe trip back to Lyon.

Endler: Have a good night, see you soon.

SONIA BOMPASTOR OLPLAY POSTGAME INTERVIEW

Bompastor: Good evening everybody. I think that tonight we have to separate the result from the context. The result at half time, as you can imagine, was not satisfying at all. We had put certain things back in order. Then in the second half, we had a positive reaction. I think that mentally we have confidence in ourselves, We didn't give up, we tried to play our game and score. We created a a lot of chances, and once again tonight we lacked efficiency. I think you said it as well, there was a lack of technical efficiency in the game overall. But we have to accept that what we showed tonight, it's not enough if we want to make it to the final of this competition, and especially if we want to fulfill our ambitions.

Journalist: Obviously we know what is said inside the locker room is sacred. But on what points, what axes was your half time speech focused on? And was the double substitution in the 55th minute the decisive turning point with regard to the final score?

Bompastor: The speech at halftime was pretty simple but a little tough, because we needed to put an emphasis on certain things, two things in particular but not just those things. The mental aspect, because we said before the game that today we had to play a game and put our hearts into it, a lot of generosity [well Gilles' mistake which lead to the Benfica goal was certainly generous...], a lot of intensity, a lot of aggression as well in terms of defending. And obviously in the first half, we clearly didn't live up to those expectations. It's mental, but physical as well. But when we can't even win our duels against Benfica, no offense to them, but in terms of physicality they're not superior to us. So it showed we needed to up our level of expectations. And then I had to ask the players to respect the game plan which had been put in place before the game, and especially to be disciplined. Because obviously before the game we covered a very specific game plan in the pregame speech, it was very detailed, and what happened in the first half was exactly what we had predicted and we weren't able to execute it. Of course we were lacking technical efficiency. So there were a lot of ingredients missing tonight to have hoped for a better performance.

Timothee Piron: Good evening, Sonia. Could you please explain - because we didn't have any information - could you please explain the choices in the midfield in the beginning of the game? Were those choices done in part because of Damaris Egurrola isn't quite ready to play 90 minutes again, or were there other things which influenced your decision for the starting 11, in particular with regards to the midfield, and the two changes you made compared to the previous game? [shorter Timothee: why the fuck was Amel Majri there]

Bompastor: Simply put, I said it after the game, the starting 11 is one that in terms of performance in the moment gives me the most satisfaction. There was also the absence of Danielle van de Donk, who performed really well in the last league game against Fleury. She was sick so we'll have her back this weekend and for the return game [emphasis added in the hopes that those mouthing off like they know Lyon will shut the fuck up]. But for the rest it's the team I deem to be performing the best at that moment. You know we have a talented roster. There's a healthy competition between the players but it also creates inter dynamics, they all need to show me they want to start. Sometimes the choices are hard to make because it comes down to really small details. As for tonight, for the starting 11, once again the performance factor was the one that had the most influence for the starting lineup.

Journalist: Sonia, just one last thing because I know you have to get going very quickly. It was important to impose yourself in this stadium, which is one I know you hold very dear [Bompastor is of Portuguese decent]. But it's also very important to have a big crowd show up on next Wednesday at Groupama Stadium in order to try and clench that ticket for the semifinals.

Bompastor: Yes, it's true that it was a special moment for me, certainly a bucket list moment in my life, to have played in such a historical stadium with a history in the Champions League - mainly on the men's side - and it's something pretty significant. My family was here as well. But beyond that, even for the players, for the club, to have had the opportunity to play in such a nice stadium, to have had the opportunity to play in front of 20,000 people, they showed up tonight and really played their part of the 12th man. They supported their team throughout the game. It definitely makes us want that, it makes us want to do at least the same thing for the return game, maybe even better. In any case, the return game will be very difficult even if it's at home. We will need to perform even better, but the public support will be necessary. So I hope a lot of fans will show up.

Journalist: [in Portuguese] Thank you very much. [in French] Sorry, Sonia. That's as far as my Portuguese will go. In any case, congratulations and have a safe trip back to Lyon.

Bomapastor: It wasn't bad.

#all good love stories start in the rain #delphine cascarino #christiane endler #sonia bompastor

1 note · View note

andespoones · 2 months

Text

Becoming

This is not a journalIt was never about youEven on moments I said it wasOn captured lightning I Arrogantly proclaimed as I, receptive of youIn this canvas where my time/space is laid outWhere my indulgent existence occupiesA speck of dust is as important as the flood of Prussian bluesSadly you shed the skin that held meAnd those whispers that sparked my soulAre the same that torched it wholeThese…

View On WordPress

#an opinion on anything #episodes of crowding loneliness #mush #poetaster #poetry #prolific nonsense #prolific nonsense propagator

1 note · View note

rinmichaelis · 3 months

Text

Committee to Protect Journalits calls out Israel

#israel #palestine #Gaza #human rights

1 note · View note

tahyirasavanna · 4 months

Text

Carol Swain is Our Generation's William O'Neal, Claudine Gay Out At Harvard Due To Mounting Plagiarism Claims, It's Giving Racism Tho

Embed from Getty Images Tahyira Savanna is a Black Lives Matter activist and has been documenting the campaign against Dr. Gay since October 7th and the attack by Hamas against Israel. Behind the Campaign to Take Down Harvard’s Claudine Gay – The Wall Street JournalIts a whole campaign funded, jus to take one of us downWe the clowns? Watch all the haters bow down…. Claudine has provided so much…

View On WordPress

#Carol Swain is Our Generation&039;s William O&039;Neal #claudine gay #Claudine Gay Out At Harvard Due To Mounting Plagiarism Claims #harvard university #It&039;s Giving Racism Tho

0 notes

dreamsandroots · 8 years

Text

Three-Eyed Truths: Creative Nonfiction as Mixology of Meaning

“Because it is idiotic. Writing when there’s nothing to say.” – Aldous Huxley, Brave New World

I’m living with the ghosts of unsubstantiated doubt. Myriad voices, student debts unpaid, hollow words from the mouths of the talking heads on TV.

Recently I completed a unit for my degree called ‘Creative Nonfiction.' In class we spent a lot of time thinking about and discussing the idea of truth—how it operates, how we approach it both individually and socially, how it’s represented and disseminated. What stood out most to me—and what made it to date one of my favourite courses during the degree—was the extreme diversity with which one can approach something like ‘creative nonfiction.’ Built upon the foundations of a hybrid form of journalism and literary fiction à la Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood, the term has also come to represent a range of contemporaneous pioneers of artful ‘fact writing’ such as John McPhee, Gay Talese and Tom Wolfe in what would eventually be loosely thought of as the ‘new journalism’ movement. Later, critics and writers would grapple with several terms which attempted to convey a more appropriate grasp of its variable core: ‘journalit,’ ‘new’ or ‘high’ journalism, ‘faction,’ to name a few. The practice seemed to be open to a diverse range of styles, including, in the words of Barbara Lounsberry, such texts as "artful memoirs, autobiographies, biographies, histories, travelogues, essays, works of journalism, forms of nature and science writing, and ingenious combinations of these forms." According to Wolfe, what results is

a form that is not merely like a novel. It consumes devices that happen to have originated with the novel and mixes them with every other device known to prose. And all the while, quite beyond matters of technique, it enjoys an advantage so obvious, so built-in, one almost forgets what power it has: the simple fact that the reader knows all this actually happened.

Scene is what underlies "the sophisticated strategies of prose" in Wolfe’s rendition of the ‘new journalism,’ and it seemingly still underlies the impetus of creative nonfiction, or what Lounsberry calls ‘literary’ or ‘artistic’ nonfiction in its current manifestations. We might however wonder about Wolfe’s assertion that an audience places an implicit epistemic trust in these narrative accounts, in knowing that it "all actually happened" despite this being the obvious appeal behind its composition and consumption.

As the decades passed, the once-authentic energy surrounding ground-level narration has become blurred by an unstoppable procession of small, yet increasingly more apparent dissonances: tiny ambiguities, according to Phillip K. Tompkins in Capote’s reporting of facts and quotations regarding one of his portrayed killers, Perry Smith; the seduction and betrayal of journalists, to paraphrase Janet Malcolm, as they circle their subjects and reconfigure their essence into an aesthetic frame; Janet Cooke’s Pulitzer Prize-winning story about an 8 year old heroin addict titled ‘Jimmy’s World’ which was revealed to be entirely fabrication; the proliferation of market-editorial online (have a quick look at most fashion, food or entertainment blogs); or the turbulent permutations of visual authenticity through the rendering of the photograph, film, documentary, news cast and ‘reality television’ show. Today, a program like Netflix’s Making a Murderer exemplifies this problematic relationship between the producer of a representation, its subject and an audience—to speak about certain issues becomes dangerous and potentially harmful, no matter how carefully researched, and filmed over however long a period of time.

And yet, the problem isn’t resolved by simply saying that such a program shouldn’t be made: if that’s the case, then what are we permitted to speak about? And who would (or could) decide such a thing?

Truth is, perhaps, the major issue, and trust in an author, a voice, a director, or any utterance, image or narrative representing a truth-relation—whether intended as casually playful or appealing to extended thought—is in a state of extreme deficit. In her book No Logo, Naomi Klein outlines the intensive market drive to co-opt culture within the confines of branded ideology. In recognition of her long-fermenting existential angst in the absence of an authentic cultural identity Klein laments "[w]hat haunts me is not exactly the absence of literal space so much as a deep craving for metaphorical space: release, escape, some kind of open-ended freedom." We might well recognise here the dark inversion of the self-assured words of Edward Bernays, whose infamously titled Propaganda begins:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World it was the malcontent-turned-exile Helmholtz Watson—dubbed with trepidation by his superiors "a little too able"—who asks "how can one be violent about the sort of things one’s expected to write about? Words can be like X-rays, if you use them properly-they’ll go through anything. You read and you’re pierced." Much like the dystopian warnings resonating throughout Huxley’s stories and essays, it seems maybe Bernays’ ‘vision’ (and dare we say his misappropriation of the medical intentions behind psychoanalysis?) has over time become realised, ingrained, internalised, and in its final form proliferated so far out of control that no conceivable force exists within either the human appetite, nor our intellectual apparatus, to entirely contain or satiate it.

We have also to wonder about the widespread popularity of such cultural minutiae as the TED talk, the YouTube vlogger, or the standup comic and the many slight variations between these forms. We’ve all felt the intractable pull of marketised double-speak. For the most part, Coca Cola is a brown, (overly) sugary liquid substance, but the conversation surrounding Coke changes our perception of it. Coke is powerful, prestigious, trusted. It certainly doesn’t leap out as the kind of substance that, according to Klein, would cause its producers to co-opt classrooms and university lectures in a demand for "the amount it paid for … vending rights" at The University of British Columbia "to be kept secret for reasons of corporate competitiveness." When I first read Bernays I was troubled, to say the least. I found his unrepentant call for manipulation unforgivable, and every adman and CEO and marketing guru-turned-politician seemed merely a further aberration of that initial spark to control through obfuscation.

I’m still troubled, at least to an extent—but I’ve come to realise this unease is only half of a more detailed picture. Huxley’s dystopian novel was brilliant, not because it merely showed the seductions of manipulation through propaganda, but also because it challenged our ideals regarding a utopian state: at what cost do we uphold the value of a contented and stable population? Where do we draw the line between a stable sense of self and a disproportionate relationship to reality? At what point can we recognise our individual social agency as one which believes things only "because one has been conditioned to believe them"?

The full picture necessarily recognises that we have allowed—and continue to allow—this void of meaning and the increasingly aggressive branding of thought. While it’s one thing to repudiate the kinds of notions that Bernays’ propagation has spawned—for a good example check out his ‘Torches of Freedom’ campaign—it’s another thing to recognise how we co-opt these manipulations, and through this recognition learn to subvert the harmful aspects of a spectacle-driven media setting and its resultant mindset. This tension leads to further questions about whether marketing in and of itself is inherently negative—which of course, it isn’t, at least in no clear way more-so than general communication, rhetoric as a device, or even any representations whose prime function is the play of semiotics. What’s harmful is the underhanded impetus to control the entire conversation, which over time has lead to the complete annexing of the word in its basest form and a compulsion to define self (and by implication social relation) through buying power. But Bernays didn’t invent the game, as much as he may have changed the magnitude with which it’s played. In its very first episode, Mad Men’s mythical conman Don Draper reminds us that "[p]eople were buying cigarettes before Freud was born."

Suffice it to say, my appetite was drawn towards this nexus point of epistemic intrigue evident in the composition of creative nonfiction, and the resultant ambiguities which lead to its demarcations between fact, art and propaganda. During my undergrad majoring in philosophy and english I became focussed on ideas surrounding semantics, semiotics, epistemology and ideology, allowing me to gain some understanding of German Idealism, Psychoanalysis and the interesting mutations throughout continental philosophy that these movements inspired. It also brought me towards a brief investigation of literary criticism with a focus on a few of the more recent movements which sprang out of the 1960s through the 90s. I enjoyed these studies immensely and recognise that one could spend an entire lifetime on any of these particular points of investigation and still never be left in want of wonder. I suppose that’s part of the appeal of timeless—and often unanswerable—questions: they tend to provide for an infinite variation of interpretation and mutation of thought.

Despite this enthusiasm for my undergraduate studies, I couldn’t help but feel that something else was lacking from these investigations. In his Republic Plato talked about the tripartite soul, or psuchê of man, roughly dividing these up into the body, the mind and the spirit as is reflected in his idealised state. Plato may have had his own tyrannical undercurrents evident in the ‘philosopher kings’ he placed as the rulers of his utopia, but it seems his conception of the triangulation of the human experience struck a resonant cultural nerve, an image that has carried Pythagoras’ numerical esotericism as far as the Christian mythos and through to other pioneers of thought including (but not limited to) Baruch de Spinoza, Georg Wilhelm Hegel, Sigmund Freud, Charles Sanders Peirce, and so the list goes on.

I grew up immersed in a family environment that placed exploration—and by implication, a sense of open-mindedness—before anything else. Although schooled and socialised within a Christian setting, my home life, and my teachers, parents, brothers and sisters encouraged a relationship with any form of knowledge, be it through various forms of art, timeless texts, pop culture on television, or the spiritual traditions found throughout the world. This translated into a love of language and an enthusiastic tendency to explore mindsets which directly challenged my own. I took a liking to english in high school, and to a lesser extent art and history classes. I went back and forth between english, psychology and philosophy in my undergraduate, finally to arrive in my aforementioned degree, thoroughly enthused yet without any discernible drive towards a particular career choice.

If it was my studies in philosophy and literary criticism that satiated my intellectual drive, and if my bodily appetite has been thrust towards the changing forms of creative nonfiction, there still remained a question of the third element, the synthetic aspect of Hegel’s formulation, the intuitive approach of Spinoza and the egoistic genesis of Freud. That void of transitory meaning, I feel, can only be approached by focussing on aspects of life which might otherwise be considered too far removed from the realm of serious investigation or consideration, and which resides around my subjective essence—that which balances my sense of self with the wisdom of logos preached by the philosophical canon. Sometimes it’s only by going to the extreme fringes of society and social ideation that we can gain a more adequate picture of the process as a whole.

In this sense, I wonder where is the place for colour in life? Where is the place for mythos? Where’s Rumi and his "fattened bird as food and serpent and snake" and his language which often defied its own meaning, which danced between descriptors and resisted the reductive scalpel of the formalists and deconstructionists alike? What place for Crowley and his mnemonic susurration? What about the poetry of Blake, or Swedenborg’s strange mysticism? Where do Pokémon or the fervid spirits of David Lynch’s world fit into the grand history of ideas? What of the bizarre explorers of science whose names can’t be mentioned? The Tim Learys and Robert Anton Wilsons? What of Carlos Castaneda and his thrust from acceptable anthropology into the truly unknown? I’m interested in the way mindless exposition can be important. The way speaking in tongues might be closer to the language of music. The way you can never write the fire of the mind, only imitate it. Words that simultaneously inspire and seek to put the mind to rest. If we think they’re not important, then it seems we might still not have fully grasped the impact of a culture co-opted towards capital as its master signifier.

This brings us, in a roundabout way, back to that matter of unsubstantiated doubt. Huxley’s savage (paraphrasing his amalgamate Shakespeare) defined a ‘philosopher’ as a "man who dreams of fewer things than there are in heaven and earth."

There’s a sense of reluctance in my attempt to write about my world without recourse to those implicit norms of my (extended) social setting, and in spite of what might be considered ‘proper’ creative nonfiction, whatever that means. The more serious academic might scorn my (sometimes seemingly disproportionate) appropriation of such a diverse range of thinkers and writers and cultural noumena, the more artistically inclined wordsmiths may equally dismiss my writing as lacking in flow and form and a more figurative reading.

In conversation with John the Savage, Huxley’s controller said of God "he manifests himself as an absence; as though he weren’t there at all." While I may not ever fully grasp what ‘truth’ is, what it means to myself and how it relates to others, all I can do is commit myself, with a sense of devotion towards discovering and rediscovering its approximation through my ongoing work. In this sense, no critic is my enemy except insofar as they may wish to impede the act of learning in itself.

To address the emotional spectre of a ghost with a conscious affirmation is not to dispel it entirely, so much as it is to dissipate its haunting presence.

#writing #thought #bernays #freud #huxley #creative writing #creative nonfiction

1 note · View note

christinamac1 · 6 months

Text

ABC journalists criticise broadcaster’s coverage of Gaza invasion - not allowed to use the word "Palestine".

This bit appeared in the print version, but not in the online version: Another issue raised related to a concern among journalits that there was a ban on reporters using the word Palestine and general confusion about what language the broadcaster had signed off on. By Osman Faruqi and Calum Jaspan, November 8,…

View On WordPress

0 notes

abigailshorel6 · 6 months

Text

Sensationalism is used to gain an audiences attention

Does drive for sensationalist conflict journalits duty for fair and honest reporting?

Fear mongering

'Covington Catholic Boys'

Media actors will start using exaggerated words and then politicians will pick up on them

Clickbait: People are attracted to drama and sensationalism.

Peoples love drama so it becomes a tool - important news can become overlooked by drama

This article has highlighted to me the term sensationalism. I think this would be a better route to go down rather than clickbait as there is so much more opportunity for research and creating a narrative. My next steps will be to look at examples of sensationalism and the impact they have. This article has discussed the 'Covington Catholic Boys' so this will be the first example I am going to look at.

#specialist practice

0 notes

skillstopallmedia · 1 year

Text

Commissioner resigns from FTC and blasts Lina Khan's management

Republican Commissioner Christine Wilson has just announced her resignation from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the federal agency responsible for monitoring the practices antitrust to UNITED STATES. In an editorial published in the wall street journalit strongly criticizes the management of the Commission by Lina Khan. Lina Khan is unpopular with Republicans Appointed to head the FTC in…

View On WordPress

0 notes

peterdecaprio · 2 years

Text

Managing Mental Health During the Pandemic

Peter DeCaprio: The world is constantly tossing between lockdowns and moving out. The COVID-19 pandemic outbreak hasn’t been kind to people. In 2020, it resulted in massive death and infection rates. Even though the vaccination drive is occurring successfully globally, there is still chances of the virus infection. If you tune in to the news, you will find updates and articles that talk about the increasing infection rates. No one still can say with certainty when the pandemic curve will flatten down completely. However, it is essential to survive amidst this testing time. And it is necessary to take care of your mental health during such challenging times.

Mental health guidelines:

Not many people give importance to mental health! They think that taking care of physical health is sufficient to survive this pandemic phase. But according to experts such as Peter DeCaprio, it is essential to bring down your underlying stress and anxiety that is bound to develop during this time. If you want to manage your mental health, you can opt-in for some of the guidelines.

Reduce your news time:

It is essential to stay aware of all that is happening in our world. But it would help if you stopped yourself before you become obsessed about it, because it can add to your worry and nervousness. Every day the news channels usually relay news updates about virus infection rates and the subsequent waves. If you are constantly listening to these updates, you might add to your stress and worry. Hence, it’s an excellent practice to detach yourself from the news as much as possible so that you can focus on other activities.

Stay focused in the present moment

It is necessary to accept that the future is somewhat uncertain. It’s because no one can say with assurance the exact date when the pandemic would come to an end. Hence, most people are constantly caught up in thinking about the uncertain future or the past. It is necessary to focus on the present moment as that will help you stay calm and positive. If you are constantly thinking about the past or future, you will be in a comparative mindset and will not enjoy the present moment. Once you focus on the “now,” you can bring down your anxieties, and it can help you boost your mental health to a great extent.

Practice writing a gratitude journal

It is necessary to think about the things for which you are grateful even when times are challenging. No one ever thought they would become homebound for a prolonged time. Most of us compromised our freedom due to the pandemic outbreak. Naturally, it doesn’t generate a feel-good factor. Hence, it is essential to tap on things that make you feel good and better. Here you can count on the things you are grateful for and make a note of it. As per Peter DeCaprio this way, you can shift your perspective and start thinking about positive thoughts that will help you feel good.

Today, it is necessary to address your mental health during the pandemic. The guidelines mentioned above can help you to do so.

Originally Posted: https://thriveglobal.com/stories/managing-your-mental-health-during-the-pandemic-essential-guidelines-by-peter-decaprio/

0 notes