So, do you want the good news first, or the bad news? CHOOSE!
 

Today a friend asked me that question of me either wanting to hear the good news, or the bad news first. It's been ages since I've been asked that question. While this might seem like a trivial observation, I thought about the approach to this question, and I wondered if it would indicate in a manner of how a person would think. I thought to myself, "does one who requests bad news first have a pessimistic view on things, or do they just want to get over whatever it may be and look forward to more sunnier things", and vice versa, if one requests good news first, to be followed by bad news if they are a positive thinker - an optimist.

I responded with a "bad news first please", so I could get over it, and then have the good news as a buffer to bring up the tone of the conversation again.

This thread brings up quite a bit of personal nostalgia. I remember in grade school where the teacher would ask “Now children, good news first or bad news? Let’s see a show of hands.” And a majority of the class would raise their hand to wanting to hear the negative news first. I found this to be the trend for most of the grades during elementary class, as well as a few in junior high class, “Okay class, the bad news is the class average on the test was 62%, however the good news is that everyone passed” (or something like that, I can’t remember something from 10 years back so cut me some slack okay).

What do you prefer, hearing the good or bad news first? Provide a reason or reasons why you choose to hear one particular side over the other, or if you really don’t care for either news.

Also, for those of you who say "do you want the good news or the good news first", then proceed to report the good news, followed that the 2nd "good news" that just turns out that there's no bad news, for fuck sakes, sorry to say but that's just lame.

If someone tells me that there is bad news, I want to know what it is right away. If I have to wait I'll start trying to figure out what the bad news is on my own and I'll probably think of something much worse than what the news actually is.

Bad news first.

It's like when you're a kid and you're eating dinner and you eat all the stuff you don't really llike first so you can have yummu deliciousness last.

Also because I like ending things on a good note.

For fear of being repetitive, I chose bad news first for all the above reasons. It's always nice to walk away with the goodness still fresh.

Bad news first for me too. At least I'll know there's something good to look forward to.

May as well take the good news first; If the bad news really is that bad, I don't think any amount of good news will make up for that. At least taking the good first you can be happy, however short a time it may be.

I usually take the good news first, but whenever i've been asked that question, it's all bad news, one's just less bad than the other.

I usually don't answer.

EDIT: shit, i voted for good news first, which wasn't my answer. O well.

Like most of us, bad news first. I think that, unless it's something really fucking horrendous, the good news afterwards will soothe it away, even if slightly. Plus, for some reason, bad news always has more of an impact than good news.

I think it's less about the good news smoothing over the bad, for me, and more about just bringing the conversation back to something positive and upbeat. Bad news is something I will stew over regardless, but if good news follows it, it allows me to just ignore the bad, or react immediately and positively with the first, best thing that comes to my head.

Bad news first please.

I generally like hearing the bad news first. This allows me to be able to ascertain how bad the bad news really is. Then I hear the good news to compare what could be more important, or affect my life more. For example,

The bad news is : The Emo Speedway cannot afford to run a Super Stock show without $4 000.

The good news is : Someone has offered $2 000 worth of sponsorship for a Super Stock show.

So, I realize that I am not doing half bad. Just have to work a little more to find the rest of the money. It makes the negative not so bad once you see the positive. I hope that is a good example. If you saw the positive first, the negative you drop your enthusiasm that much more.

Definitely prefer to receive the bad news first. There's always something to look forward to when you take the bad first and the good later. It's much like being a pessimist or optimist, I think. Being a pessimist you are expecting things to be bad so when something good happens you are more glad than an optimist who generally assumes good things. It's always nice to look forward to something.

Plus, the good news can counter-balance the bad news. The Wise Viki's example portrays this wonderfully:

Bad news first. That way, should the news be something like "I know I'm your best friend, but I slept with your girlfriend" the good news might be able to save his ass from getting destroyed by a flurry of fists.

Key emphasis on might, both meanings.

I'd say the bad news first as well. That way the good news can help soften the "damage" of the bad news after it hits.

Like the guy who died in Oregon recently, James Kim. Fortunately his wife and kids were saved, but he died while trying to find help on foot.

The "good news" isn't that his wife and kids were saved (that is good news though, regardless), it's the fact that this guy managed to travel almost 16 miles/25 kilometers after spending several days in their car before attempting to find help.

Experts initially thought he only travelled about 10 miles/16 kilometers, and they said the distance he managed to cover in his condtion, and situation (I'm guessing where he was at was probably a snowy, mountainous terrain) surprised even them.

So what this guy did was an incredible feat of determination, stuff you probably hear about all the time of regular people managing to do some extraordinary feats. While it's not likely that this guy will become really famous, at least his family will have that memory where he tried to save them and did all he humanly could in order to try and save them (at least they were also able to find his body, instead of letting it decay out there in the woods), and he can at least be one of many examples of what people can do in times of crisis (again, consider the distance he travelled, and the condition of his body and the area he was going through). Most of us in his situation probably wouldn't of been able to go that far on foot in cold weather.

I noticed that as well. In grade school, most of my classmates preferred to hear the bad news first followed by the good. It was interesting that they were always like that.

If asked, I'd probably take the good news first. I don't think my overall feeling would change much after I finally hear the good and bad.

Good news first. I prefer enjoying that three seconds of happiness before "lol yer mom just died" and the crying and pain that follows. If it were the other way around I couldn't enjoy the good news of "hey, I brought you a slice of pizza."

I usually like to make a joke about it, like "I have bad enws and good news, the bad news is that I lost $200 at the track. the good news is I just saved 15% on my car insurance by switching to Geico"

Both at once, mixed together in one action packed sentence that will result in a legendary happy sad face is the only way to go.

"Your cat here's an ice cream died"

The bad news:
"I know I'm your best friend, but I slept with your girlfriend"

The good news:
"The good news is that now that I've slept with your girlfriend, I'm not your friend anymore so you are totally free to destroy me with a flurry of fists. Enjoy!"

Anyways, I don't know. I think I'd go for the bad news last. That way I could focus on those and, if possible, make it better. The good news would probably clear themselves out w/o any effort. I don't know about the bright and cheerful conversation aspect. I mean, if the news are really bad, no good news is gonna make up for it. The conversation will probably end up in the direction of the bad news... It all depends on the circumstances, though, of course.

I want the bad news first it gets it out of the way. Besides the good news will at least lessen the blow of the bad news that is received.

Bad news first because with the good news it can balanse it out :)

I wanna say that bad news first then good makes sense for me, but I think in any cases where I've been given this choice, I've been inconsistent. I could go good news first, and then just downplay the bad news. I'd do the same thing if the bad news came first, so I don't really care.

I'd choose the bad news first. I don't know why, I guess I'd rather be disappointed or devastated or whatever and then get the good news to cheer me up (hopefully) after that.

It would depend on the situation for me, but most of the time I would rather have the bad news first.

Bad news first, though I really can't recall anyone ever actually asking me this.

Bad news. I guess it's so my soul wouldn't be crushed afterwards.