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

Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

raptitude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 741 posts

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#81

Post by 0x4d464d48 »

"To be clear, I’m mostly talking about following TV and internet newscasts here. This post isn’t an indictment of journalism as a whole. There’s a big difference between watching a half hour of CNN’s refugee crisis coverage (not that they cover it anymore) versus spending that time reading a 5,000-word article on the same topic."

This is important.

I haven't watched cable news in years (maybe a decade now?) but still check in with long form journalism for in-depth exploration of a topic.

I think this right here is a source of all of the evil mentioned in the article:

https://fs.blog/narrative-fallacy/

I'm not always above creating narratives and cherry-picking information that feeds those narratives because, end of the day, Im human just like everybody else. But being aware of this and learning how to better catch yourself as you're doing it does make a massive difference. It also damned near forces you to try and look for information closer to the source.

(Try reading news sources in another language from another country and watch what happens. Ideally you wouldnt use Google Translate)

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#83

Post by flats »

I strongly agree with this. I would, however, like to call out one TV program here in the U.S. that I think comes much closer to approximating the experience of “reading a 5,000-word article”: PBS NewsHour. It’s great, completely free and available to watch online, and you can even get most of what you need from their podcast alone (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/feeds/rss/podcasts/segments).

It consists of fairly in-depth, thoughtful coverage of both domestic and worldwide news topics, as well as a tiny bit of political analysis on Mondays and Fridays. It almost never devolves into the breathless, “the world is about to end”-type coverage found on basically all cable news programs. Judy Woodruff and her team are really great. I dearly miss Gwen Ifill and Jim Lehrer.

The Economist is also a great resource, as has been pointed out by other commenters here. They publish an audio edition of each week’s newspaper, too.

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#84

Post by fma »

yojo wrote: post #54
macksd wrote: post #4

I fully agree with this. Scanning Google News or a couple of the more professional international news services like BBC / Al Jazeera / Reuters I still feel pretty well informed (and confident that there's usually nothing of immediate consequence to me) but it doesn't grow into "expert analysis" or impact my feelings much. Here's another thing I noticed: how manipulated / manipulative it is. And not just news and I do…

I'm a firm believer in quality over quantity when it comes to news. Google News has gotten increasingly annoying though, forcing me harder toward the "personalized" results, the kind of filter bubble I'm intentionally trying to avoid. What worked well for me was getting a print subscription to the Economist. They definitely have a bias (particularly in their editorials), but it's mostly of the "free trade" variety, w…

Google News' most annoying thing now is they implemented infinite scroll....

FWIW I have a subscription to a major news paper + local to avoid the filter bubble. The major is a little conservative leaning and local a little liberal.

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#85

Post by brimble »

penjelly wrote: post #73
brimble wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly all of it is, for most people, when it comes to national and international news. It's little more than low-value entertainment. Which is fine, but people get all kinds of crazy ideas about "needing" to follow the news closely to be a good citizen or whatever. Nah. Much better if folks would spend that time reading books on political science, economics, policy, and history, rather than the news. Spend a couple…

local news is still guilty of a lot of the same, but agree its better and agreed on your other points.

Oh the quality may be crap, but there's a much higher likelihood of learning something you can act on, even if it's just "oh, that band I like is going to be in town".

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#86

Post by tiahura »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #40
macksd wrote: post #4

I fully agree with this. Scanning Google News or a couple of the more professional international news services like BBC / Al Jazeera / Reuters I still feel pretty well informed (and confident that there's usually nothing of immediate consequence to me) but it doesn't grow into "expert analysis" or impact my feelings much. Here's another thing I noticed: how manipulated / manipulative it is. And not just news and I do…

About a decade ago I started reading law blogs instead of the news. They're written for other lawyers, so they're well composed, often without excessive hyperbole. The writing is far higher quality than typical journalism. They're actually informational in terms of describing the mechanisms behind power in our society. In terms of focus, if something is truly important there will always be a legal analysis. Celebrity…

If you're talking about Law 360 and similar sites for legal news, sure.

If you're talking about political news, no. Some of the most hyperbolic, partisan, and bizarrely flawed takes on Trump, and the US political situation over the last 5 years, have come from lawyers. It's been embarrassing.

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#87

Post by consumer451 »

cpach wrote: post #34
nautilius wrote: post #13

Spoiler: He did not actually quit the news, just watching news on TV as opposed to reading articles. > I’m mostly talking about following TV and internet newscasts here. This post isn’t an indictment of journalism as a whole. There’s a big difference between watching a half hour of CNN’s refugee crisis coverage (not that they cover it anymore) versus spending that time reading a 5,000-word article on the same topic.

Yeah enormous difference. It is indeed a good idea to avoid TV news. My suggestion: Go to a news stand instead and grab a copy of The Economist. One who does that will learn much about the world. About countries one rarely hear about in other media outlets. About advances in science and technology. In my opinion, time spent reading The Economist is not wasted. Well that’s my 2¢ anyway ¯\＿(ツ)＿/¯

> It is indeed a good idea to avoid TV news.

I was in the original wave of "cord cutters," it's been 20+ years. I have also spent many of those years abroad. My exposure to TV news is around 1-2 hours per year, in various countries.

When I visit my family back at home there is normal American news on the TV. I can only last a few seconds before I have to leave the room because the news is presented as if the audience consists of people with a 5th grade education. It is beyond insulting. I never felt this until I left TV's influence for a few years. This phenomenon is extremely exaggerated in the USA.

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#88

Post by rootusrootus »

systemvoltage wrote: post #9
macksd wrote: post #4

I fully agree with this. Scanning Google News or a couple of the more professional international news services like BBC / Al Jazeera / Reuters I still feel pretty well informed (and confident that there's usually nothing of immediate consequence to me) but it doesn't grow into "expert analysis" or impact my feelings much. Here's another thing I noticed: how manipulated / manipulative it is. And not just news and I do…

My father tells me - "Why do you care what Andrew Cuomo is doing in New York city?" and it kind of was eye-opening. I really don't. I wish I paid more attention to local news, local politics, and perhaps check-in on international news on a weekly basis. The internet changed all this. When I was growing up, my dad read local newspaper daily. National and international news were briefly covered in the local paper. He'd…

Exactly. Now the major team sport is who you want for President, even though he arguably has the lowest impact on your life. As long as he doesn't hit The Button.

IMO people ought to put down social media, put down the national news, and pick up their local newspaper. Read about their own mayor, city council, whatever. And maybe even get involved -- depending on the size of your city, an ordinary individual can actually get involved at a meaningful level.

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#89

Post by ok123456 »

ppeetteerr wrote: post #24

So much to unpack here. 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 invalua…

>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.

Yeah, good luck with that. Even what appears to be purely factual reporting is subject to bias in the form of what gets factually reported and what is simply ignored. Several good examples of this were documented in "Manufacturing Consent."

Opinion and national bias often creep in to so-called factual reporting by 'expert analysis.' You really have to go to primary sources and evaluate them for yourself. Putin giving a speech is easier to evaluate than a talking head from the Brookings Institute who somehow ended up as their 'Russia Expert' because he studied abroad there 15 years ago for a semester.

Re: Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

#90

Post by rootusrootus »

MangoCoffee wrote: post #30
mrweasel wrote: post #7

At someone point in the last two years I stopped watching the news, because it was just an endless stream of useless information about COVID. I’m not sure I felt better, but it certainly saves some time. Point 3 is spot on, most of the commentators have no idea about what going to happen. At best their guesses a marginally better than my own. Once you realise this, watching debates between journalist and political co…

a lot of news is clickbait or junk. Buzzfeed is the pioneer of that. there's a reason why trust in media is decline https://www.pewresearch.org/2022/01/05/trust-in-america-do-a...

> Buzzfeed is the pioneer of that.

Ironically, BuzzfeedNews is pretty good.

Post reply on HN