Familiar with the adage No news is good news? Well, if you are not, now you are. It dates back to 1616 and King James I. He said No news is better than evil news. Running a country or two no doubt was not an inherently sanguine matter. But of course. Being the person who, by birthright, has been given the task of running what now is called the United Kingdom must have had its share of difficulties. Some of the bad news KJ had to process was transmitted by Corantos: printed sheets reporting on foreign wars; Broadsides: single-sheet prints posted in public squares; Newsletters: summaries of important developments; Pamphlets: small booklets analyzing religious and political events. How quickly “new news” could be delivered that long ago likely took enough time for whenever that “new news” arrived even newer, new news had developed. It was, however, in 1616, cutting edge communications.

410 years later, the means of reporting news is seamlessly conveyed, 24/7. News now comes from countless sources, with zero lag time. It would only be out-of-date viewing or reading owing to abstaining from turning on a TV, radio, smart phone, or laptop for just several hours. Given smart phones and their video capabilities, the vast majority of people in developed nations are de facto “reporters” themselves. And yes, the bodycams and now even “camera glasses” are a thing. Any such video, capturing events in front of its lens, becomes news to anyone who views it after-the-fact. It may be enjoyable video or pictures. Or what is revealed represents a version of that “evil” that bedeviled King James.

We are now living in much smaller world than was the case those 410 years ago. Smaller as in content communication is instantaneous. New news comes at us in very real time, too real perhaps. Starting about 20 years ago, one’s entire life could be followed virtually moment-to-moment, starting with the delivery room action. Many born in the pre-“smart” 1980s can now still have a good chunk of their lives captured and carried around in a pocket or purse. Frivolous or urgent moments. Today, Instagram, Tik-Tok and other social media platforms allow for one to post numerous “news” entries everyday, with the hope of getting huge followings too. All mental/emotional states are invoked, from the vapid to confessional to self-pitying. Social media is awash with mostly banal and self-important “news”. Keep scrolling and maybe run into something authored by credentialed reporters. Social media allows for anyone at any time to be a reporter whose ego-maniacal subject matter never changes. Empty calorie content.

Professional reporting, one the other hand, using the rigorous ethics of honest journalism, tries to provide credible, needed information. Sadly, and evermore frustratingly (for some) what constitutes “news” these days might easily channel King James refrain about “no news is better than…”

Beyond the facile “content creators” of Insta-Tok, the mountains of less than cheery developments from myriad news organizations, some practicing real journalism and some with overt, subjective agendas, often results in an avalanche of contentious interpretation. What are the facts? Whom can you trust? Who said what, where and when? Major media reporting is now barely any less dubious than the posiers on the Internet. Who doesn’t have a smart phone ? And now we have those smart watches and eyeglasses. A world awash with potential chroniclers of the good, bad and in-between developments. Ugh. Checking the daily news has gotten to be a matter of cognitive dissonance for many.

Yuck! Hard to watch. The geo-political landscape is now seemingly incapable of being a source of anything other than enervation and consternation. Just turn away and try not to think about it. But for those that still take a cynical peek at the news now and then there are the rare but really important and pleasing stories that come along, and professional or amatuer reporters likely provide the video.

How about seeing–at first live, but then always accessible for further watching–something inspirational? Something that powerfully reminds the viewer that selflessness and courage, incredible heroism can take place at any moment, and anyone who encounters such a story is compelled to wonder if they, too, could be so selfless and heroic? It would be a powerful piece of This news is very good news!

Here are two instances of of such unexpected, inspirational news:

Lenny Skutnik and Arlund Williams. January 13, 1982. An Air Florida jet with 79 people on board strikes a bridge and plunges into the freezing Potomac River.

Arlund passed on taking hold of a rope thrown out to those needing rescue from the freezing Potomac. Before he himself could be recused he drowned. He saved 5 of the six survivor’s lives.

Lenny Skutnik, having left work that afternoon, saw the dire situation from the river’s edge. Seeing one woman who was clearly not going to be able to swim in the harsh, freezing conditions, he dove in and got her to safey. There is video footage of the tragedy, including Lenny’s selfless rescue at the risk of his own life. Whithout him deciding he could not watch her drown, there would have been ony 5 survivors. Could you be Lenny? Or Arlund? In the real world, when you realize you have that choice to make.

Much more recently the media-sphere witnessed the grit and determination of Ryder Williams. Ryder, a lifeguard at a Santa Cruz, California beach, can be seen jumping into ocean when he saw a young boy struggling in the roiling surf. The video was captured by a bystander on the beach. Ryder clings to the boy but is getting pounded by wave after wave, at time disappearing from sight. But he finally gets the boy close enough to shore for another lifeguard to save the day. The boy nhe saved was 10 years old. Ryder Williams is all of 16. And while saving that boy’s life is what Ryder‘s literal job required him to do, seeing how he could, himself, have died by doing his job made the video so compelling.

These occasional encounters with news documenting how saving a single life when the odds doing so are not favorable are inspiring and an antedote for the documentation of how some people’s lives are lost with absolutely zero justification. Watching these moments when a child buried under the rubble of a earthquake is found alive days later, or a woman or a boy are saved from drowning, or other such life-affirming stories shown are made all the more urgent a reminder of how all lives do matter. The typical news of the day sadly suggesting otherwise.