Live data from Hacker News

Things You Notice When You Quit the News

raptitude.com

301–310 of 502 posts

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#301
post #67

I quit watching the news right around 1999. My family once challenged me how I knew about important events, and I told them that people in my life would let me know if anything occurred that I needed to know. They challenged me by quizzing me on major recent events. When they did find one that I had no idea about, they asked, "See? Nobody told you about that!" I replied, "You just did." And they have not argued about…

The downside of this approach is that if we all did it then the world would be a much worse place. Paying attention to current events and bearing witness to some of the darkest aspects of human history is important at a societal level and if you don't think it is important to you personally then consider yourself lucky to live a life where the real world doesn't creep in often. Understanding topics such as why refuge…

> The downside of this approach is that if we all did it then the world would be a much worse place.

Or not, maybe it would be better. Imagine country where people are mindful about their immediate surrounding and don't buy into ideological bullshit sold by mass media. Want to send young men to some war? Well tough luck, if there is no conflict at the doorstep then this move is probably to benefit someone else, not you.

Refugees overflowing streets? Common sense tells you to take a look at what kind of people they are and if they are good and acknowledge their situation and want to better it, then help them. But if they act like arrogant invaders then common sense would be to tell them to bugger off. Yet media adhering to its ideology would tell you that you are wrong to use common sense. That somehow WYSIWYG is not right here and that some abstract oppression these people are fleeting from is more important.

>and the consequences of climate change are critical to a healthy and functional nation

Lets see how in future china deals with climate change as opposed to societies with 'well informed' citizens.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#302

I can't really get onboard with this. A lot of the comments here, and the commentary in the article itself, talk about how depressing the news is, how biased it is, about Gell-Mann amnesia -- and they're all right. But from my own experience, the people I know who don't follow the news (either at all, or extremely minimally) are spectacularly ill-informed; they get their news either third-hand (which suffers from all…

I agree. Ignoring bad news for the sake of feeling a bit better surely isn't a sign of being adult and mature. However, I also believe that TV news and constant news checking are unnecessary and can make you depressed. You can easily get a wrong perception of mankind in general and the stupidity of other people by consuming too much news. This happened to me recently with news about Trump and the composition of his n…

News companies all have owners and management. I think it is important to be informed about who the owners of newspapers are, and what their political views are, because ultimately the owner will hire and fire the Chief Editor who sets the tone for the paper. It is also important to know what the Chief Editor's political views are too.

Its important to ask yourself why you trust a certain news outlet.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#303
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Not only that, I used to be a commercial pilot, and I could not believe the amount of disinformation and outright ridiculous theories being bandied about by so called 'reputable' news sources. This is true every time there is a news story on about anything that somebody around me is an expert on. It's always "what the hell are they talking about!?" I've seen this directly, too. I've been on the local news quite a fe…

>"I've seen this directly, too. I've been on the local news quite a few times, and EVERY TIME what they end up broadcasting, and what I was explaining to them are different things." Completely agreed from personal experience. Not new but always worth re-iterating. The news can't even get the basic facts right without twisting through addition or omission. How are we supposed to rely on them when factual sources are s…

I have seen this happen to a friend. He was active in a political party, and was interviewed by a local station which was doing a piece on politically active millenials.

They sent a reporter with a camera crew and he spoke to them for over one hour about his political views and ambitions. In the end, only a single soundbite ended up in the piece. It was a metaphor he used somewhere inbetween, so forgettable that I can't even recall it.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#304
post #282
post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is inevitable. Even the effect of mass media going against so-called "fake news" won't have the effect they desire: In my estimation people will stop trusting and hence following all of it. It pays off, for as you and I have both gathered from the comments it is obvious that people do feel their lives improve once they "tune out". Since 2010 or so, this applies to me as well. Besides, I don't know for ho…

One thing to add: the only source I loyally follow is the No Agenda Show ( http://www.noagendashow.com - a podcast which I help out technically, fully pro bono) because they are the only source of media that has no advertisers to keep happy, they get 100% of their income via donations, and they don't even digest the news as much as analyse where the news comes from, and what the interests and hidden agendas are of th…

Sounds interesting, this is the kind of thing I have been looking for.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#306

I can't really get onboard with this. A lot of the comments here, and the commentary in the article itself, talk about how depressing the news is, how biased it is, about Gell-Mann amnesia -- and they're all right. But from my own experience, the people I know who don't follow the news (either at all, or extremely minimally) are spectacularly ill-informed; they get their news either third-hand (which suffers from all…

This is modulated by the fact that most people don't arrive at their opinions through critical thinking (I think it's overwhelmingly clear that humans are fundamentally irrational and not fundamentally rational).

So based on that, you could make a strong case that following the news will in the vast majority of cases turn an uninformed, dogmatic Democrat into an informed, eloquent Democrat, and same for Republicans, and therefore won't affect their vote. (Again, in the overwhelming majority of cases, not in all cases).

Then there's the issue of media quality. Is CNN high quality journalism? How much time did they devote to Yemen, then? (on the TV channel, that is) Is Trump eating KFC with a fork more important? The media blames Trump for this, but their ratings-obsession is their own responsibility.

The issue of Trump's phone call to Taiwan is a great example.

On CNN, you get pundit hysterics about Trump's "incompetence".

On Stratfor, you get an insanely good article[0] that goes in-depth on the historical context behind the US-Taiwan "non-relationship", the reasons why Trump "highly" likely planned the phone call carefully, why the Taiwan issue is a red-line issue for China, and why this play on Trump's part could signal a shift to put China back in their place. As Stratfor says: "In the Track II talks between U.S. and Chinese figures, it isn't uncommon for the [Chinese] to berate their American counterparts while the former offer declarations of cooperation and critiques of their own government's policies", so this Trump move may bring much-needed leverage back to the US.

This is just an example of very high-quality vs trash media coverage. Avoiding the mainstream press and seeking specialized press seems like a basic requirement if you want to be informed.

There are 2 "problems":

- People that stay in their bubble and only follow biased news (which includes mainstream news, which has a mediocrity bias. Most people are in this category)

- People that choose to follow almost no news, because there's no person al benefit (after all, if following the news doesn't directly earn you more money, you're wasting your time. This category includes probably quite a few people on HN, but few nationally)

The former cannot be "solved" without censorship. The latter is what very few people talk about, and it does not want to be solved.

We all want to live in a society where most people are informed, except the personal ROI of it is substantially negative. The smart choice is to be underinformed, if you value your time. The people claiming "we all have a societal duty to stay informed" never bring this up, and never offer a resolution to this dilemma. Kantian ethics (what I do is moral if and only if the world would still be fine if everyone did the same as me) disregards the fact that nobody wants to be the sucker.

[0]: https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/taiwan-trump-and-telephone-h...

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#307
News is one thing, political spin is another. I think news is good. Most "news" is really political spin though. As a US citizen, what I did was start only reading UK news. That helps because I'm not interested in UK politics, and articles about US politics there are both fewer and a little less spinny. So reading BBC/Guardian lets me focus more on the actual things happening in the world.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#309

Anyone who thinks they can disconnect from "the news" is kidding themselves. Unless you do the whole hermit thing, you are influences. Not watching CNN won't prevent other CNN-watchers from talking to you. Reading only paperback novels won't stop their authors, who also read newspapers, from influencing you. Politics is everywhere. Take star trek. We all know the basic stories, and the thematic changes over the years…

I agree. All TV and film writers whether intentional or not, inject their politics and morality into their work.

Its something that takes many years to realise and fully appreciate.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#310

Well, I guess it depends on your news source. I'm from the UK and I've always thought the following about US news vs UK news (and this may be a bit stereotypical): - US TV news: hopelessly biased and sensational, sometimes hysterical. - US newspapers: outside of the tabloids, generally serious and reputable. Ethics and integrity are taken seriously within the profession (even if not always adhered to). - UK national…

Internationally, US Newspapers have a very good reputation.

But if you read a US Newspaper daily, is is ridiculously biased. The longer form investigative reporting articles are usually outstanding though.

Post reply on HN