Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

Firstly, the Cable news stations (CNN, Fox News) aren't news programs - despite the name - they are talk shows. It's Maury for politics.

The broadcast news, that's news. But it's not without its problems. Whenever I would over hear my mom watching it - it's so shocking how it's done. some of my gripes, based on what little I've seen over the past few years:

- The tone of the newscaster has changed - they don't sound like they're just reporting it - there's emotion or gravitas in their voice that make what they're saying authoritative.

- When they cover politics - especially elections - it's always a fluff piece about the big two candidates. When the democratic primaries for the 2016 election were happening - they'd barely mention anyone but Hillary. You'd have 10 minutes of Hillary, 1 minute of Bernie and 0 minutes of everyone else. Same in 2020, but add Biden. It's no wonder my mom had no idea the other candidates even existed. (and don't get me started on how the candidates make up issues just to debate them - so tricky - pick a hot button topic that is important, but may not be important right now - I think we know the big ones)

- Fear mongering - this goes with the first one I listed. Instead of simply reporting that tragedy happened and giving the facts, they'd just keep the emotional level up. It's a bait and switch. You get drawn in by it and then vote for whoever is going to "fix" everything. The morality of it is, in my opinion, similar to what psychic does - play on the emotion of someones tragedy for money.

And I say all this as someone who doesn't follow the news or politics very closely.

For starters, being informed makes for more interesting conversations with others. It means that you get to reflect on what you stand for, and grow as an individual with an opinion.

News is also the gateway for deeper information. If you stick to just the news, that's one thing, but if you then go deeper into the topic (what is the relationship between Ukraine and Russia?) then you get invaluable context. Without following current events, how would you know what is an important topic to follow?

Finally (but not lastly), news makes you informed when it comes time to vote at the municipal, state, and federal level. If you don't follow the developments in your community, your vote is at best useless, at worst it's harming the democratic process.

Edit: I should be clear on what I mean by news. In the traditional sense, it's reporting on facts, checking sources, and providing two sides to every story. Opinions and partisan "news" are not that.

The way I describe it is that all you can ever hope for with "following the news" is eventual consistency with some representative subset of world events. I don't know what's happening as it happens, and I don't know everything that's happened, so I'm (by the requirements of reality) both behind and only updated on some events.

I'm just happy being far longer on the "eventual" window and having a somewhat lower amount of representative content.

What I've also learned is that almost everything actually important will filter to me some way or another. It's absolutely impossible to live under a rock if you interact with other people, because they'll ask you about XYZ event. And, often, enjoy updating you if you've not heard about it!

I also agree with the "Read three books" observation - I'd rather someone recommend three books on an interesting topic to me than link me to some hour long video. The books take longer, but I'm likely to have at least some familiarity with the topic, from a few different points, with the books. YouTube will make people think they've got some understanding, when it's largely missing.

there's a reason why trust in media is decline

https://www.pewresearch.org/2022/01/05/trust-in-america-do-a...