> makes for more interesting conversations
If "interesting" is talking about the latest outrage that everyone will forget in a week, sure. If on the other hand you find "interesting" to be debate on the philosophical principles of private ownership or the moral relativism of a state's relationship to vulnerable populations, ya ain't gettin that from the news.
> It means that you get to reflect on what you stand for, and grow as an individual with an opinion.
You can do that without the news. And having an opinion is like having an asshole: everyone has one, and you should probably keep it to yourself.
> Without following current events, how would you know what is an important topic to follow?
There is no objective importance other than what will directly affect your life. The news is mostly national and international information, which rarely ever directly impacts you (unless it is "impacting" your amygdala). Local and state actions are much more likely to impact you, but I doubt you follow local or state news, if it's even covered at all by journalists as more than "here's all the local crime to scare you and keep you tuning in".
> news makes you informed when it comes time to vote
The news rarely (if ever) lays out out all the positions, track records, or experience of candidates in local and state elections. But they do parrot talking points and promote the candidates with the most money and influence.