121–130 of 262 posts
It's factual enough not to induce rage/emotion, and superficial enough so as to not be a time sink.
Every other form of news/media I feel is a rehash of reuters/AP headlines but with all the emotion/clickbait involved.
I like Wikipedia's current events portal [1]. Does not (generally) include frivolous news, and provides a much wider perspective than most news outlets [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events/November...
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33417715
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33417336
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just today I ran across this widely promoted ABC/CBS article claiming that "Texas, Oklahoma ranked among least safest states in the country". The type of supposedly non-opinion flavor piece syndicated above-the-fold in Windows 11 Search, Apple News, Android home pages, and Reddit/Twitter defaults. https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/texas-oklahoma-ranked-among... It turns out that it is wholly based on a corporate PR pu…
Drug overdoses are probably a pretty minor impact to safety though, right? And vaccination rates are a pretty standard way to indicate the safety of a community against a virus...
Check out the Wikipedia "Current Events" page. It's been my main source of news for the past few years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events The nice thing is that you don't get the usual heavily US-centric political bias, and instead just see stuff happening around the world. The obituaries are on the side as well, which is convenient because, being Wikipedia, you can easily read about them.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33417715
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33417336
Check out the Wikipedia "Current Events" page. It's been my main source of news for the past few years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events The nice thing is that you don't get the usual heavily US-centric political bias, and instead just see stuff happening around the world. The obituaries are on the side as well, which is convenient because, being Wikipedia, you can easily read about them.
I love Wikipedia's "Current Events" portal so much that I have built a search engine for it: https://pastevents.org/ PastEvents is my entry point to the news nowadays. It updates daily and I can look at source material and relevant articles linked directly from the event, as well as search the past for related events to understand chronology.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33417715
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33417336
I’m going darker by the day. I don’t seek out news, and when I do read it, I tend to feel disturbed by how little it presents as reporting, and instead, how much it appears to have an agenda. I could do better. I followed the Ukraine-Russia war for a while, and although I wasn’t glued to it, I put too much focus on it. There is literally nothing that happens if I know what’s going on there. Nothing at all. It distrac…
> Nothing at all. It distracts me from my family, friends, work, and myself.
> I have no interesting insights or original thoughts about it, and if I did,
> absolutely no one would care. So why read it?
Do you vote or participate in politics in any way or do events in the news directly affect your life? One reason it's rational to read the news: If you don't read the news, then you're at risk of lacking important contextual knowledge about society and social norms. It's pragmatic to keep track of these conversations to avoid embarrassment and to not behave in ways that might offend others. I find it useful to be aware of contentious issues on which I might have a side or a stake.
The most disturbing fact for me is the thing when news push narratives. One example was the short squeeze on Gamestop. Hedge funds had overleveraged their shorts and people took note. The media was on the side of the hedgefunds glossing over the fact that the funds got caught redhanded with shorting more stock that was available in the liquidity pool. I commented this on one article and a reminder that back in 2008 that this particular news outlet had stories about regulation of stock shorting for these very reasons and that they glossed over the fact that hedgefunds where doing something bad. My comment was removed, but I noticed more than one antisemitic Rotschild banking conspiracy comment just left there to reinforce a narrative that there are people out there talking about "evil jews". News can't be trusted.
As others have pointed out the news is no longer just reporting or analysis, but also has an agenda. Not reading the news is not a solution. My solution: read news from multiple sources, and extract the actual news by removing the coloring of the source and their agenda. This is not foolproof but works better than not questioning the possible hidden agendas.
I pay for Bloomberg, WSJ, and NY Times. Its an okay mix, with its leaning, but a phenomenal mix with the depth of reporting. I've stopped bothering with free news. archive.is doesn't quite cut it
The only authentic news source for me now, is two private twitter lists I maintain, one named "left" and the other, named "right." These are loose terms - not fully indicative of the accounts that form the lists. These two feeds give me a range of perspectives on any current happenings from (loosely again) far left to far right, with everything in-between. And then, from that and the counter-arguments that I see on b…