Recent studies suggest that anger can have two outcomes: conflict and growth. It all depends on one’s motivations and purposes. Narcissistic anger is a reaction to a personal slight and ends in unsatisfactory results for both parties. Righteous anger has a higher goal: moral outrage at some injustice, either small or large. We have noted that anxiety, by which we mean incessant worrying or fretting over things one cannot control, has become a normal condition in today’s society and represents the first step in a progression toward anger. Our observations suggest that once anxiety takes hold, the next phase is frustration, typically over the fact that nothing is changing or that some objective is ignored or blocked. Bias emerges because individuals look for scapegoats and targets for their anxiety and frustration. And finally, outrage or anger breaks through when problems persist unabated. Somewhere after frustration and bias, perspectives change, depending on the person. Anger may become moral outrage, typically targeted toward some injustice, or conditions may overwhelm the individual or group and move them toward anger expressed through violence. What is curious about the situation is how effectively digital media have created a pathway to convert frustration into bias and bias into violence. Undoing anxiety could disrupt the pathway that leads to anger and would lessen society’s current fit of anger. What we have called the Battle for Consumer Time seeks to retain a consumer’s attention, and the most effective way to do that, at present, is to appeal to emotional attachment by keeping viewers and listeners angry at something (see inThought, 3/8/18). For now, media personalities are acting angry to keep viewers or followers distressed in order to retain their attention, which attracts advertising dollars and votes. People seem to get angry because, for those exploiting such a reaction, Staging Anger pays.