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

201–210 of 741 posts

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

#201

Post by secabeen »

ROTMetro wrote: post #143
yojo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I used to find the Economist great, but with the corrosiveness of everything this last bit, they seem to sneak agenda into articles now days in a way I feel like this whole post is trying to move away from. Maybe as a lost Libertarian who can't stand the control everyone's lives progressives I feel that has crept quite a bit into the Economist. It's funny it bothers me as I have reached a point where I feel Libertari…

The Economist is clearly not a Libertarian newspaper. They represent the classical liberal position, which is not Libertarian, and never has been.

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

#202

Post by buffalobuffalo »

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…

I actually switched from google news to bing news, just because their user preference algorithms are so underdeveloped. So it's essentially like not being in a filter bubble.

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

#203

Post by cpach »

ROTMetro wrote: post #194
deltaonefour wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My suggestion is don't even bother with the economist. It's news in more pretentious and intelligent packaging. It's honestly better than some other sources for sure, but that isn't the point. The point isn't to find good sources of news. I think the point is that most news, no matter how good it is, is largely pointless. I'll pick up the economist if something in it interests me. Otherwise I largely ignore all news.

And it definitely is biased. It sadly very much "informs" you towards having the opinion it wants to promote which is what I think we are discussing getting away from.

If I may ask, what other publications do you recommend that you deem more objective? Do they also cover large swathes of the whole world, like The Economist does?

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

#204

Post by JKCalhoun »

pengaru wrote: post #49
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…

Same here, just scan news.google.com periodically, never watch anything unintentionally [0]. The incessant talking heads are such obvious brainwashers, whenever I get tricked into watching some in a clip or at a bar/taqueria it's utterly offensive and patronizing manipulative trash. I can't imagine how broken people are who constantly consume the stuff. [0] youtube-dl is a godsend for maintaining this without totally…

> I can't imagine how broken people are who constantly consume the stuff.

I would say for starters that they live in a much more frightening world than you and I live in. And that is very unfortunate.

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

#205

Post by Justin_K »

andi999 wrote: post #192
ROTMetro wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to find the Economist great, but with the corrosiveness of everything this last bit, they seem to sneak agenda into articles now days in a way I feel like this whole post is trying to move away from. Maybe as a lost Libertarian who can't stand the control everyone's lives progressives I feel that has crept quite a bit into the Economist. It's funny it bothers me as I have reached a point where I feel Libertari…

Did you try the financial times? I sometimes find them shockingly unbiased.

In college we were required to get a subscription to FT and I found it quite liberal. As was the professor who required the subscription.

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

#206

Post by the-dude »

brimble wrote: post #76
floren wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The timestamp on that comic was about 20 years earlier than I expected :)

Timing's about right for the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, since that news broke at the beginning of '98. And we already had multiple 24/7 cable news stations by then. :-(

It is a bird.

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

#208

Post by logicalmonster »

Quitting the mainstream news is probably the best approach for most people, but I think critically paying attention to the news is also very illuminating and it's something that I don't think enough people do. Pay attention to how they advertise and monetize and operate.

Here's just a few observations off the top of my head.

* Fox News and CNN often get compared as being the opposites of each other, but there's one big difference in journalistic integrity that I can see. With Fox, you know who the straight news people are and who the opinion people are. With CNN, the line is blurred beyond any recognition.

* Particularly when it came to Trump, many news headlines during the last 6 years or so have been literal mind-reading about his mental state, thoughts, and goals, and I'm not even joking a little. If you start paying attention to this, you'll notice that so much of the news literally involves mind-reading.

* Paying attention to the advertisements made during the news is also critical because all humans have bias. Every other ad is for some damn pill, cream, or suppository from Big Pharma. Any news report involving health should be viewed through this lens as news agencies know who butters their bread.

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

#209

Post by BeetleB »

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…

> Scanning Google News or a couple of the more professional international news services like BBC / Al Jazeera / Reuters I still feel pretty well informed

I once spent several years diving deep into news, and one of the lessons I learned was that scanning headlines (or even summaries) is a very good prescription for being misinformed.

There's the obvious selection bias - you only see the headlines they put on top. But it's fairly common that the body of the article undercuts the headline. The headline will be stated definitively, whereas the nuances in the details will make you doubt the certainty of the headline. In a few cases, it would even negate the headline!

And this is from well regarded news sources (NY Times, WaPost, etc), not crappy click bait farms on the Internet.

“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” - Mark Twain

I'm a firm believer that one should either dive deep or not read the news. The moderate path leads to the most misinformation.

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

#210

Post by agambrahma »

Changes that have worked for me:

- stop reading any form of "push news" (so, no Google News, Apple News etc) - whenever you feel the urge to read something, save to read-later service (I use Instapaper) - print subscription to Economist

You realize you never needed to "keep up to the minute", and it's okay to find out about things a day or two later

Post reply on HN