So look at environmental reporting, not much gets done on remediation and improvements. There are a ton of hazardous substances that we were dumping into the water 40 years ago that we aren't anymore, but it doesn't drive nearly as much engagement so doesn't get reported on as much.

>... but the main reason is that bad news actually outweighs good news, at least as far as things like climate and environmental is concerned.

This is my point though. Is it? It is the different between feelings and facts. It feels like everything is negative and doom and gloom because that is all we see. That is all the algorithms seem to feed us. It's what we remember and what is reinforced by interactions with other people who are also getting the same gloom and doom we are.

A negative feedback loop where negative things drive us to click on more negative things, training our algorithms that we want to see more negative things.

TL;DW: Back when climate change was first being studied, climate scientists all were more or less convinced we were on an 'apocalyptic' trajectory. Today, we have made enough progress in the past few decades that most scientists agree we have likely avoided "worse case" scenarios. Still bad, but not end of humanity levels predicted before.

We aren't making quick progress, but progress is being made.