Things You Notice When You Quit the News • Hacker News Board

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#401

Post by bshimmin » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 3:36 PM UTC

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #392

bshimmin wrote: post #261

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…

>operate with only the sketchiest understanding of what's happening in the world. What sort of practical utility do you gain from being "informed" by "the news"? Could you give an example or two of how being informed by the news made you operate differently in your day to day life?

Good question (apart from the scare quotes!).

I run a software consultancy based in the UK. I work with a variety of subcontractors, most of whom are based in Europe. The outcome of Brexit might potentially have a significant impact on my way of working with Europeans; I don't think it will, but keeping abreast of that (developing) situation is fairly important to me.

I'm going to Venice on Wednesday. If there had been riots following the outcome of the constitutional referendum, I wouldn't be going to Venice on Wednesday.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#402

Post by comicjk » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 3:41 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #379

trendia wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this episode was rather funny, because they found that a right wing fake news site was actually run by a liberal who wanted to prove there was right wing fake news (and that it would be shared on social media, which they ensured by spreading it themselves). It turned out to be rather profitable for him.

The part I found hilarious is that there was one particular quote from the NPR coverage which spread like wildfire on social media - the one about how he tried to write fake news for liberals, but it just didn't catch on. Except that when I went looking for more information, one of the first successes I found reference to - via the Denver Post's article[1] about the FBI agent suicide fake - was "ATLANTA OFFICER KILLS…

I don't think the claim falls apart on inspection - the fake FBI suicide story was shared 2.5 times more on Facebook than the fake Atlanta shooting story. Do you have any examples of liberal fake news that were as popular as conservative fake news?

FBI suicide, 569k: https://graph.facebook.com/?id=http://denverguardian.com/201...

Atlanta shooting, 222k: https://graph.facebook.com/?id=http://baltimoregazette.com/a...

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#403

Post by DonaldFoss » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 3:45 PM UTC

vog wrote: post #252

cyberferret wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, full disclosure, we DO watch the odd NetFlix shows etc., but I think the biggest difference is (a) no ads at all (b) no news blasted at us and (c) we can choose exactly what we watch, and when we watch it. We can happily go weeks without turning the thing on, and we do the occasional weekend binge of a TV series. The difference is that it is totally under our control, and we can select the content (and reject i…

In Germany we have the term "Zeitsouveränität" which means time sovereignty . That term originally appeared to describe workplace conditions and biography. However, nowadays it is mostly used to describe media consumption. You decide when to listen to news or watch a certain show, the same way you decide when you read the next chapter of a novel.

Very nice. I saw the word "Zeitsouveränität" and knew the literal meaning but didn't realize it's modern usage.

In reality, time sovereignty is the only worthwhile thing wealth gets us, because time is our most valuable resource, a non-renewable one at that.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#404

Post by DonaldFoss » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 3:48 PM UTC

Haul4ss wrote: post #397

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #393

>nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. the real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knolege with the lies of the day. I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens, who, reading newspapers, live & die in the belief that…

To be fair, in Jefferson's time newspapers were overt instruments of a political faction. You started a newspaper to spread your point of view. We have at least a veneer of nonpartisan purpose to the major newspapers of today, although you can argue they still have a bias. Online news/blogs/etc. are more analogous to the newspapers of the early Republic.

Those biases were on full display this year, not even bothering with the normal veneer.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#405

Post by ashark » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 3:53 PM UTC

bshimmin wrote: post #261

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…

Has being well-informed about the news ever helped you in any way? Beyond, say, traffic and weather? National/international news, especially, since that's usually what people seem to care about for some reason? If it has, has it helped you enough to be worth the time and mental effort expended on it over the years?

I guess I can see how being unusually well informed in news relevant to a very specific economic sector might help one make a good investment choice or something, especially if you get that information before most others do, somehow. But general news? I think it's very unusual for that to improve one's life in any real way, especially compared to the time it takes. Knowing in detail the daily developments of e.g. the war in Syria or Trump's cabinet picks is of little more personal use than knowing who's backstabbing whom on Days of Our Lives. It's entertainment or a fairly low-value hobby, even when the reporting's well-done.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#406

Post by CaptainZapp » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 3:59 PM UTC

mSparks wrote: post #389

zmb_ wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is the opposite. And I'm definitely not blind to the Gell-Mann Amnesia, I notice it on Wikipedia all the time. I've noticed that in The Economist the articles about my field of technology, work, and my small home country, have been accurate to the point that I suspect they have had experts in the field involved in creating them. That gives me confidence in the articles about issues I'm not intimately fa…

yes and no. Ive noticed the economist has a habit of playing policy games. In that case they publish nonsense to further certain policy aims. But often its well researched unbiased material. not that easy to tell the difference. but infinately better than the junk put out by the likes of the bbc fox cnn times etc.

Totally agreed.

But the nice thing about the newspaper (The Economist refers to itself as a newspaper, not a magazine) is that they provide pure opinion journalism and as a reader you know exactly where they are coming from.

While I agree a lot with the publication (for example: they argued to liberalize drugs, or advocated gay marriage literally decades before it was chic). I encounter my share of (what I lovingly refer to as) full-of-shit opinions, with which I wholeheartedly disagree.

Overall, though, it's one of the last remaining publications, on which I put a certain amount of trust because they usually know what they're writing about and even on the subjects on which I (partially vehemently) disagree it's always an interesting read.

Because they argue their position intelligently and competently. It won't make me a believer, but it's useful and interesting to get the counterpoint from a reputable and trustworthy publication and sometimes get your dogmas slightly shaken in the process.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#407

Post by DonaldFoss » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 4:00 PM UTC

thewarrior wrote: post #285

bshimmin wrote: post #261

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…

Some of the arguments here remind me of the puritanical strains of religions. For eg: I am against Wahhabi Islam. They're just like other Muslims but they take percepts that are valid in Islam and run with them to the ridiculous extreme. Same goes for cutting down on Social media or regulating your consumption of news. There is nothing to be gained by turning into a puritan. It makes you feel good about yourself for…

Not a downvoter-the opposite in face.

From a rational, logical, and chemistry point of view, one cannot have a balanced view or understanding without positives and negatives.

The only thing that makes it work is critical thinking; or at least rational thinking, though rational thinking is easy enough to manipulate by any sophist. Recognizing the forms leads to recognizing the art of sophistry as it occurs. However, emotion is even easier to manipulate and inflame, ridding one of the possibilities of rational thought.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#408

Post by UhUhUhUh » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 4:04 PM UTC

I grew up in a world where the "news" were streaming through teletypes from "agencies", themselves connected to field "reporters", to newspapers and radio or TV outlets. These were Reuters, AFP, UP, AP, Stass, etc. These news were the kernels from which outlets would develop their own interpretations. This kind of news still is, I contend, the only one worthy of the term, stimulates interest and does not provide any answer to the questions/problems they may raise. That's my job. My daily ration is composed of sources that are as close as possible to such format. Mostly scientific news, HN, and France24. Re. the OP, I think anyone could at least agree that not watching the "infoshows", as I think it is appropriate to call them, results in an improvement in one's mood.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#409

Post by athenot » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 4:09 PM UTC

I stopped watching TV news about 15 years ago. But I was an avid consummer of news on the Web until about 2 years ago and severely curbed it to preserve time and mental bandwidth.

But I realized that I would still read articles based on whatever was in my social media feed, and that tended to gravitate towards the affect-driven news that I fled when I stopped watching TV news.

So recently I subscribed to a good old-fashioned newspaper (NYTimes). It kills trees, it's not real-time, it gets wet outside. But I get to read news in a different mind-set:

- I found I'm now reading news to understand, not to prepare a witty reply/comment.

- I enjoy the dryness of the paper medium as it further decreases the emotional appeal.

- Op-Eds/columns are clearly marked as such; I find the distinction more obvious than online where the context of "today's paper" doesn't really exist. I still read them but I'm placing their contents in a better context.

- Reading the news has become more efficient. Instead of using news as a time-filler between holes in my day (and invariably getting distracted), it's a one-time review that takes just a few minutes depending on how much I want to read. It's counter-intuitive but the by-product is that now I'm happy to ignore news articles when they come across my feed online (unless it's some specialty topic). That ends up being a time-saver.

Re: Things You Notice When You Quit the News

#410

Post by DonaldFoss » Mon, Dec 12, 2016, 4:14 PM UTC

jonathanstrange wrote: post #289

bshimmin wrote: post #261

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…

Try TheHill.com and AllSides.com. I find AllSides.com useful for presenting the same story from multiple sides and biases. The Hill aims to be apolitical and center biased, and does a fair job.

Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with either site, and I do not endorse either site. My opinions are my own.