As an American, I love choices.

But, like most Americans, I’m swimming in them. Treading choice waters, it turns out, may create its own special brand of anxiety. That’s what author Barry Schwartz gets at in his book The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less.

“To express yourself, you need an adequate range of choices,” he writes. This applies to everything from voting to buying clothes to consuming news.

We express what it means to be American through conspicuous and varied news consumption. It informs, and helps guide choices about how we run this republic of ours.

Yet, if Schwartz’s paradox is true, the cost in time of weighing different information sources can outstrip the value of the information gained. I’d say that if that time isn’t here, it’s near.

Information, or what many now call “content,” arrives at doorsteps in print, at the tips of fingers on remotes and through cable or DSL to the backs of computers. For example, my news comes from:

• Associated Press wire access at home and work;

• The Newshour with Jim Lerher on PBS;
• CNN, Fox, MSNBC and a local ABC news affiliate;
• Two or three newspapers, including my own;
• The Economist and Mother Jones magazines;
• and an assortment of Weblogs.

As a newsman, I feel obligated to stay informed. But, is the time I spend informing myself well-used?

Schwartz uses a few social science terms – “satisficer” and “maximizer” – that apply to this situation. A news maximizer would seek out the immaculate information. That is, among the 24/7 barrage of facts and opinions, there lies a definitive last word, and the maximizer spends inordinate amounts of his time hunting it.

A news satisficer would hunt until she found what she perceived as enough – sufficient facts to make educated decisions about, for example, tomorrow’s weather or November’s election.

The satisficer model, Schwartz contents, is better for mental health and the fitness of the community as a whole. So what strategy helps us know enough to make decisions, without spending each waking hour waiting for information nirvana from CNN?

“This is tough, but not because there are so many options,” Schwartz wrote in an email exchange. “Rather, it’s because ALL of them have gotten worse, so you feel the need to be consulting several to get at the truth.”

While having one news outlet might prove limiting, having to choose among thousands for outlets that merit attention tries the patience. Each has a piece of the puzzle, and we have to consult dozens to have an idea what the real picture looks like.

Schwartz continued: “If there were fewer options, the remaining ones would feel the need to reach more and diverse audiences.”

Fewer information sources would each contribute a larger piece of the real picture. So, how can the news consumer help initiate this media Darwinism?

Learn about news, and how it is packaged and delivered. Pay your highest attention to the journalists that do it best. Learning about journalistic method is the best strategy for recognizing a talking-head from someone who did his homework. This category includes primary and quality second-hand sources. If you can’t get it from the primary source, get it from a trusted intermediary.

Devote less attention to journalists who sit further from the source of news. If you’re getting information from a journalist that you could have gotten through a quick Google search, you deserve better. Also, avoid journalists with a pattern of using unnamed sources. Gossip and innuendo travel that way.

Pay no attention to flash sans substance journalism. Broadcast networks supply their news arms with footage of popular reality TV shows. When those news organizations build coverage around that footage (for the two fans who watch the show, but missed the episode when Jenna got booted from the island/expensive condo/beauty pageant), it vapidly takes up information space. Every minute spent covering a celebrity murder trial, marriage or lesbian affair is a minute not spent looking at how government spends tax dollars, gets into wars or behaves in closed session.

News consumers can’t exactly change the outlook or output of news organizations. But, making smart choices about informing ourselves can eventually send a message to those newsrooms about our priorities.

To paraphrase a favorite quote: Essential news is that which helps us keep our freedoms.