How the News Took over Reality
theguardian.com
How the News Took over Reality
1–10 of 41 posts
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#2> We marinate in the news. We may be familiar with the headlines before we have exchanged a word with another human in the morning; we kill time on the bus or in queues by checking Twitter, only to find ourselves plunged into the dramas of presidential politics or humanitarian emergencies. By one estimate, 70% of us take our news-delivery devices to bed with us at night.
Some people do this. And I'm guilty of having been one of them. But I realized that the constant negative news cycle started to shape my outlook on the world around me.
Earlier this year I decided that the cycle of indulging in consumption of (usually negative) news, worrying about it, and then repeating is a waste of time and probably takes away from who I am rather than adding anything of real value. I don't check Twitter, I trying to avoid Facebook. I don't even watch my favorite late night talk show hosts (sorry Colbert). I've replaced them with audiobooks and podcasts.
I am significantly happier for it. And minor anxieties I had that were unrelated to current events seem to have gone away too.
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#3Without even reading it I think I can predict the unspoken intent of the article: anything that undermines our suppression of opposing viewpoints must itself be suppressed.
Off to check.. Yep that's pretty much the gist of it.
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#4Without even reading it I think I can predict the unspoken intent of the article: anything that undermines our suppression of opposing viewpoints must itself be suppressed. Off to check.. Yep that's pretty much the gist of it.
While I enjoy reading some of the political reporting on Brexit on the guardian, they are amongst the least balanced newspapers on general societal and cultural issues.
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#5[deleted]
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#6Without even reading it I think I can predict the unspoken intent of the article: anything that undermines our suppression of opposing viewpoints must itself be suppressed. Off to check.. Yep that's pretty much the gist of it.
While I enjoy reading some of the political reporting on Brexit on the guardian, they are amongst the least balanced newspapers on general societal and cultural issues.
what does balanced mean to people who comment on the lack of balance in the news? giving equal weight and time to all viewpoints? that seems to be a crazy thing to expect since soke viewpoints are totally bonkers (example: flat earthers). perhaps a better way to critique would be to specify exactly what viewpoint you feel is being ignored or treated unfairly and justify that claim. otherwise “not balanced” comes across like a thought terminating meme, with no information attached.
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#7Twice, now, I've written a story--and deleted--about local TV news people I'm close to compared to when I worked in TV news in the early 1970s. There is no comparison and I wish I could leave what I wrote here.
Back then, the TV news reporters were former newspaper reporters who spent days digging political underhandedness. I once had a TV reporter call me, recently, cause someone referred her saying I had knowledge of a topic. Misunderstanding what she asked, I called back 30 minutes later I did have the information she needed but she said it was too late and they weren't going to run the story.
A few days ago, a news producer was reviewing dog toys.
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#8Without even reading it I think I can predict the unspoken intent of the article: anything that undermines our suppression of opposing viewpoints must itself be suppressed. Off to check.. Yep that's pretty much the gist of it.
While I enjoy reading some of the political reporting on Brexit on the guardian, they are amongst the least balanced newspapers on general societal and cultural issues.
Why would you expect balance? With the possible exception of the Independent which tries, no British newspaper is attempting balance - they’re all opinionated.
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I enjoy reading some of the political reporting on Brexit on the guardian, they are amongst the least balanced newspapers on general societal and cultural issues.
what does balanced mean to people who comment on the lack of balance in the news? giving equal weight and time to all viewpoints? that seems to be a crazy thing to expect since soke viewpoints are totally bonkers (example: flat earthers). perhaps a better way to critique would be to specify exactly what viewpoint you feel is being ignored or treated unfairly and justify that claim. otherwise “not balanced” comes acro…
It means they have fully subscribed to an intersectional victim culture that is obsessed with race, identity and oppression. It means giving platform to e.g. journalists inciting personal campaigns against e.g. Tim Hunt or whoever is the wrong-thinker of the hour.
Outrage sells so this is a rational strategy for them, it is just surprising they have a better reputation than, say, Fox News.
Re: How the News Took over Reality
#10Without even reading it I think I can predict the unspoken intent of the article: anything that undermines our suppression of opposing viewpoints must itself be suppressed. Off to check.. Yep that's pretty much the gist of it.
Well, it's the Guardian after all, what did you expect?
Establishment press was bad in the 60s already, which was why there was a flourishing counter-movement, from the early Rolling Stone to underground press.
In due time, the Rolling Stone turned to the content-less rag that it is today, and e.g. the once revolutionary Liberation turned into a centre-left more of the same, similar fate awaited most of the once alternative press.
Nowadays with the web as equalizer, alternative sources also directly compete for viewers with any established outlet (they're just another URL away). So they are far more fierce with them, presenting any opposing viewpoint as beyond the pale (even if shared by a great chunk of the population, or even the majority), and cheering for their de-platforming.