Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 378 posts

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#21

Post by currymj »

gnud wrote: post #15
sorenn111 wrote: post #9

Amen, faster and more frequent news is certainly broken. However, I worry that we are fighting against human nature. The use of smartphones has demonstrated, I believe, that people will blindly chase their dopamine hits coming from a variety of formats because it is ingrained in human nature. The dopamine reward pathway gives a good feeling and people are naturally inclined to follow the path of least resistance to m…

This is really not a new fight. It used to be tabloids vs "real" news - I'm not sure how different today's online battle is. Except for some reason, most of the "real" news are becoming tabloids when moving online.

It may be that now editors and journalists get instant feedback about number of clicks, shares, ad impressions and so on, so that they can chase dopamine hits just as much as the audience can.

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#23

Post by clay_the_ripper »

steelframe wrote: post #14

I stopped reading the news about a year ago. I felt like my emotions were being manipulated by a sharply-honed system built precisely to invoke outrage and draw you in to read more and more of it. I've been able to direct my focus and energy to much more productive tasks since I disconnected. Of course I entirely missed that whole Supreme Court thing until after it was over, and I have no idea what people around me a…

Did the same thing about 4 years ago and haven’t looked back. I find though that a lot of people are actually offended by it since I have no clue what thing they and everyone else is outraged about. I get accused of not caring, being disengaged, blah blah blah. It’s difficult to explain to people who are still deep in outrage mode, so I mostly avoid taking about it.

My life is so much better since cutting out the news. I am happier, more focused and able to actually concentrate on the things that I care about.

I prefer to think about how I can positively impact people around me and my local community, rather than embracing the culture of outrage about things happening thousands of miles away that are ultimately irrelevant.

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#25

Post by chiefalchemist »

Actually, what we need first is:

1) A common and agreed upon standard definition of news.

Facts alone are not news. News also has importance and relevance. It's not news simply because a (major) "news" outlet publishes it.

I ate eggs for breakfast. That's truth / fact. It's not news.

2) A common and agreed upon standard definition of journalism / journalist.

Again, working for a "news" outlet does not make you a journalist. Journalism is a verb. It's a series of actions. It's not a (self-anointed) title.

3) Transparency and full disclosure about what is news (objective) and what is op-ed (subjective).

True story: I've seen a friend who has formal higher edu training in journalism (major'ed or minor'ed, I don't recall) take a (political) position on FB and then back up his "facts" with an op-ed piece. This isn't uncommon.

Edit: Typos

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#26

Post by openasocket »

notacoward wrote: post #13

Reading the print version of a newspaper isn't going to help, because they're just as guilty as anyone of putting up repetitions and very minor updates of the same few stories instead of actual, y'know, new things that have happened. Just look at what's on the NYT front page right now . * "The Border Is Broken. And There's No Plan To Fix it." Yawn. This has been in heavy rotation for weeks . Also, poor grammar. * "Bl…

> "The Border Is Broken. And There's No Plan To Fix it." Yawn. This has been in heavy rotation for weeks. Also, poor grammar.

That's a long form article about a variety of issues with the immigration system, from immigration courts to how migrants are detained. It's very informative. I read a lot on the subject and I found more than a few facts in here that I wasn't aware of.

> "William Barr Testimony Highlights: Attorney General Says He Thinks ‘Spying Did Occur’ on Trump Campaign Video" Also on heavy rotation for days now.

How has that been reported "for days now"? That quote is literally from his testimony earlier today.

> "Black Hole Image Revealed for First Time Ever" Super cool, but after the first thirty stories I saw about this I'd like to hear about some other scientific advance.

But it's not like the NYT has 30 stories about this, the fact that we have a lot of different news sources isn't a bad thing. Though you do have a point about a lack of scientific reporting

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#27

Post by thewordis »

sevensor wrote: post #22
thewordis wrote: post #12

I subscribed to Delayed Gratification quarterly for this purpose. https://www.slow-journalism.com/

This is the first I've heard of Delayed Gratification. That's a hefty subscription price -- is that their main source of revenue?

It appears they get their money from subscriptions, yes. There aren't any ads in the magazine. They also do some classes on how to make infographics and write articles.

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#28

Post by chiefalchemist »

alexmingoia wrote: post #18

Skip the news entirely. What value does it add to your life? I’m happy reading blogs and periodicals with my RSS reader (feeder.co), which I check in the morning over coffee. I choose what’s in my feed, not some algorithm, advertiser, or news editor vying for clicks.

re: "Skip the news entirely. What value does it add to your life?"

Yes and no. If it were, by definition, truly news then it would / could add value. The problem with the current media environment is what's passed off as news is in reality fake news. That is, it lacks relevance and importance.

That's. Not. News.

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#29

Post by notacoward »

openasocket wrote: post #26
notacoward wrote: post #13

Reading the print version of a newspaper isn't going to help, because they're just as guilty as anyone of putting up repetitions and very minor updates of the same few stories instead of actual, y'know, new things that have happened. Just look at what's on the NYT front page right now . * "The Border Is Broken. And There's No Plan To Fix it." Yawn. This has been in heavy rotation for weeks . Also, poor grammar. * "Bl…

> "The Border Is Broken. And There's No Plan To Fix it." Yawn. This has been in heavy rotation for weeks. Also, poor grammar. That's a long form article about a variety of issues with the immigration system, from immigration courts to how migrants are detained. It's very informative. I read a lot on the subject and I found more than a few facts in here that I wasn't aware of. > "William Barr Testimony Highlights: Att…

> That quote is literally from his testimony earlier today.

So if he repeats the same claim every day, NYT should displace something else to report on every instance?

No.

Re: The Urgent Quest for Slower, Better News

#30

Post by tombert »

I remember when Jon Stewart said years ago that the 24-hour news cycle is really designed for 9/11; for anything less than a catastrophic event like that, they have to manufacture problems.

I think the worst offenders of this are Fox News, but it's not like CNN or MSNBC are blameless. Spending days talking about the latest typo on in the president's tweet ends up with a bizarre view of reality; even if you're not watching Alex Jones or Sean Hannity, there's this bizarre, us-against-them, almost-conspiratorial vibe to a lot of what's in the news.

BTW, I'm hardly better; I used to check Donald Trump's Twitter daily as well, for almost two years.

Post reply on HN