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

651–660 of 741 posts

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

#651

Post by spywaregorilla »

butwhywhyoh wrote: post #387
spywaregorilla wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure things were just as shitty in 2017

Seems like OP would disagree with you strongly and had a rather intense reaction to the state of media in 2022. Do you have anything to offer a counter opinion?

Cable news has always been terrible during my periods of awareness. The pattern of always breaking news filled with outrage. The term outrage porn was coined in 2009. It's been obvious to me for a very long time that it's garbage and not worthy watching.

2017 is a small step backwards. Most mainstream forums are pretty shit at any point in time.

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

#652

Post by tonyedgecombe »

mixedbit wrote: post #301
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…

After one year of subscribing to the Economist I like it, but would prefer if it was a monthly newspaper with 1/4 of the content. Reading it throughout each week takes quite a lot of my reading time and I have a feeling that dedicating this time to books would be better. Monthly with well selected topics would be enough to stay informed of important current issues.

I know what you mean which is why I tend to buy it every other week. I still haven't finished the Christmas issue.

Some advice I picked up on HN which works well is to start at the back and make your way to the front.

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

#653

Post by Scharkenberg »

inopinatus wrote: post #597
Talanes wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fine to be upset about the Overton window of American politics, but I don't think it's too egregious that an American publication describe their politics within the usual political language of their country. Or, at the very least, it's not deceptive to call themselves "centre" as neoliberals in a country where the majority understand "centre" to mean "neoliberals" (even if they don't actually know what "neoliber…

The Economist is a British publication.

This is peak HN discussion.

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

#654

Post by lordgrenville »

drenvuk wrote: post #533
ff317 wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal favorite recommendation in this vein is The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/ . They've got some great writers and editors and often deliver pretty unique insights. Their articles tend towards long-ish-form, but not nearly as long as e.g. the New Yorker. They're a little less world-focused and more US-centric, but not completely. There is some bias (isn't there always?), but I've seen them cover a si…

The Atlantic. The New Yorker. The Economist. These are neutral to left facing. In a feeble effort to avoid being put in a different bubble, does anyone have something that an educated republican/conservative would read?

My recommendation for that would be https://www.nationalaffairs.com/ Thoughtful and driven by social science.

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

#655

Post by ubercore »

Lascaille wrote: post #627
kelp wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there is objective agreement that the Economists views are right-wing neoliberal capitalist. AllSides rates them as "Leans left": https://www.allsides.com/news-source/economist They've endorsed Democrats for US President since 2004. Ad Fontes also rates them slightly left leaning: https://adfontesmedia.com/the-economist-bias-and-reliability...

[flagged]

It's pretty cynical to say something like access to abortion is a "minor semantic detail".

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

#657

Post by onethought »

hutzlibu wrote: post #644
QuercusMax wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate? Seems pretty accurate to me.

It basically oversimplifies "right" to selfish ideology and "left" to ideology of "greater good". For once I would argue, it is for the greater good, if "selfish" individual rights are increased - and apart from that, I think using the left right spectrum is not very helpful for anything, but dividing society into tribal thinking.

Capitalism, or more specifically inequality created the tribes. Denying their existence is to purposefully avoid looking for a solution.

It’s not an ideology of greater good. I mean it literally in the utilitarian sense: left thinking, focusing on improving the plight of wage earners literally effects more people and is a greater good.

Improving/preserving wealthy elites will naturally benefit fewer people.

These are facts, with evidence. I can go deeper if you find this simplification too blunt. It isn’t overly simplified it. It describes what the left right spectrum means, and yes I’m applied a value judgement, but I can back up my value judgement with facts.

I’m not an extremist in my views though, and I will accept democratic processes, and there is benefit to floating around the spectrum, rather than committing to a single point.

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

#658

Post by berkes »

mahogany wrote: post #65
cpach wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)＿/¯

> 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. To play Devil's advocate, why is it useful to spend time learning about these types of things -- world politics, economics, even current scientific developments? Is it mainly because it's…

My reason for reading in-depth articles and books is to increase my learnings on all these topics.

Partly for entertainment. But mostly because our world is hyperconnected. A looming war in Eastern Europe, combined with supply-chain shortages, apparently has a giant effect on stock prices. So, in order to understand why my pension is at risk, what I can do to secure it, or whether I should wait with buying a new car or house, , I need to know about 1) Russian Geopolitics, 2) Natural-Gas usage, 3) Supply-chains of, mostly, computer-chips, 4) inflation and then, 5, how all this ties together.

We live in a hyperconnected world where every butterfly has profound effects on my daily life. For me, that means I try to avoid reading about every butterfly or wing-flapping (i.e. the daily news) but I try to learn as much as possible about underlying mechanisms and issues.

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

#659

Post by hutzlibu »

onethought wrote: post #657
hutzlibu wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It basically oversimplifies "right" to selfish ideology and "left" to ideology of "greater good". For once I would argue, it is for the greater good, if "selfish" individual rights are increased - and apart from that, I think using the left right spectrum is not very helpful for anything, but dividing society into tribal thinking.

Capitalism, or more specifically inequality created the tribes. Denying their existence is to purposefully avoid looking for a solution. It’s not an ideology of greater good. I mean it literally in the utilitarian sense: left thinking, focusing on improving the plight of wage earners literally effects more people and is a greater good. Improving/preserving wealthy elites will naturally benefit fewer people. These are…

"Improving/preserving wealthy elites will naturally benefit fewer people.

These are facts, with evidence"

You are implying, that it is a fact that right leaning people want to preserve wealthy elites.

But this is not, what I heard from right leaning people as their goals.

"Capitalism, or more specifically inequality created the tribes."

And I believe, tribes existed way before capitalism.

So I believe, that you are indeed quite extremist in your ideology, if you know as a fact, that left is good and right is bad.

There are many, many different contradicting views and concepts on the right as well on the left. To some I agree, to many I do not.

But as an example, the nazis are considered quite right usually. But it is nationalsocialism. The concept of the greater good for the people (of one race). So they are left then?

I rather think the whole left right concept is flawed and not helpful.

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

#660

Post by lifeformed »

hutzlibu wrote: post #644
QuercusMax wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate? Seems pretty accurate to me.

It basically oversimplifies "right" to selfish ideology and "left" to ideology of "greater good". For once I would argue, it is for the greater good, if "selfish" individual rights are increased - and apart from that, I think using the left right spectrum is not very helpful for anything, but dividing society into tribal thinking.

I mean, it's true if you reinterpret "selfish" as "individualist". At the end of the day its "prioritize concerns of the individual at the expense of society" versus "prioritize concerns of society at the expense of individuals".
Post reply on HN