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

The power of ignoring mainstream news

joel.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 108 posts

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#71

Post by quesera »

ghshephard wrote: post #63
quesera wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed that you summarized the slant for 3 of your 4 chosen sources, but not for NPR. I'm always curious about well-informed opinions regarding NPR's editorial position, and would like to hear yours. For the record, I have read a fair bit of BBC News and CSMonitor in past years, and came away feeling that the Beeb was predictably middle of the road, and CSM was actually fairly good. I haven't read Al Jazeera but h…

NPR clearly has a world view that they are posturing, It's just hard to nail down. They tend towards being liberal, and intellectual eliteness, but I've heard balanced stories on abortion, israel, and even gun rights - so they throw me off. NPR reminds me of Justice Kennedy. The majority of the time (as in, 90%+) I can tell you where Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, Sotomayor and Thomas will vote on a…

Great analogy. Thank you.

I enjoy NPR, but I often feel a little too "over-chummed" after spending too much time listening. I worked in public radio (not national public radio) for a long time, and I know that it's very easy to assume that your listeners are a) the same listeners as yesterday, and b) agreeing with you.

And often they are. The wretched worst part about NPR is the sycophantic "I'm intellectual, you're intellectual, we're all intellectual here" callers on the few shows that take them. Spending too much time in the aural company of those people makes me feel insufferable.

The news is pretty solid, though. And the APM shows are excellent.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#72

Post by kika »

quesera wrote: post #58
bpatrianakos wrote: post #46

This is terrible advice and not something I think people should be recommending to others. I love Joel's posts enough to subscribe to the rss feed (which I have never done for any site ever) but this post is something I strongly disagree with for many good reasons. The idea he puts forth is incredibly naive and has not been taken to its natural conclusion. He talks about the negative side of keeping up with the news…

The critical error in your logic is to believe that "the news" is news . It just isn't. By and large, it's noise , which you either have time for in your life, or you do not. I understand your worry about ignorance, and it's valid, but I believe that tuning into the noise makes people stupid. Ignorance can be resolved much more quickly and on-demand than stupidity can.

It's worse than noise. It's usually a propaganda. Which is basically a noise with malicious intent.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#73

Post by bpatrianakos »

quesera wrote: post #69
bpatrianakos wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignoring news outlets leaves you without a chance though. Yeah, there's lots of news coming out of many mainstream outlets but if you tune then out completely then you leave yourself without even the chance to filter signal from noise. It doesn't take that much effort that it becomes not even worth trying anymore. Just because there's lots of noise in your signal doesn't mean you throw away the signal with the noise…

That argument can go both ways. Some people, on a steady diet of noise, are even less able to discern sense from nonsense. Anchoring and all that. When the national news was 30 minutes every night, maybe there was time between that and the next 'cast to assimilate and critically consider what you heard. Nowadays, if you're thinking about the news, you're less than a click away from the next iteration of someone else'…

I feel like everyone is taking what I said to be an extreme opinion. I'm not arguing for daily monitoring of the the news. I'm not advancing the exact opposite of what Joel suggests. I'm suggesting something very moderate.

So yeah, checking in every week or two works. That's fine. Religiously following news is just as bad as not following any news. So we can agree on that part - the checking in part. I'm not sure how often is necessary but picking up a newspaper or watching a news cast here or there is enough.

When you say "Heck, why think?" you seem to say it with disdain as if it were a bad thing. It certainly can be and these days it's doing more harm than good but part of what was great about the news is that it took the burden of thinking away from people. So then when you hear news, instead of trying to make sense of it yourself all you have to do is ask two questions:

1. "Do I trust the way this reporter has put together this story and why?"

2. "Do I agree with the viewpoint presented" (applies for opinions mostly)

News was biased from the start and news anchors did the a lot of the legwork of thinking for the viewer and it was okay because they could be trusted. It was only once "the powers that be" caught on to the fact that Americans trusted what they heard and once they mostly stopped evaluating it that they took advantage.

There was a time when Edward R. Murrow presented the facts to the American Public and very plainly presented his own opinions to the viewers and it was valuable and trustworthy. He used his position to help take down McCarthy when the House Unamerican Activities investigations were going on. In that situation it was well worth staying informed. People felt it was their civic duty to do so. It was also a situation where me opinion had merit and the other was clearly wrong. The news used to have nuance and it wasn't childish like today's choice of either "everything has to seem equal" or "all our biased opinions are right" type news networks/shows.

But I digress and romanticize the news. You're right. You're basically saying news in moderation is good. I couldn't agree more. Being a news junkie and ignoring the news is detrimental while moderate news intake is helpful. That's all I'm saying.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#74

Post by dionidium »

ghshephard wrote: post #60
bpatrianakos wrote: post #46

This is terrible advice and not something I think people should be recommending to others. I love Joel's posts enough to subscribe to the rss feed (which I have never done for any site ever) but this post is something I strongly disagree with for many good reasons. The idea he puts forth is incredibly naive and has not been taken to its natural conclusion. He talks about the negative side of keeping up with the news…

"Not following the news is what causes harm." - I totally agree with Joel here, and disagree with you. I've spent the last 5 years pretty much a news junkie. I spent 2-3 hours a day, equally split between the NYT, WSJ, Economist, and weekends spent listening to NPR. What I've realized is that, in general, I'm not better informed about the world, but I am more indoctrinated into the Left Wing (NYT), Right Wing (WSJ) a…

Reminds me of this quote from Christopher Hitchens:

“I became a journalist partly so that I wouldn't ever have to rely on the press for my information.”

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#75

Post by GFKjunior »

giardini wrote: post #55
bpatrianakos wrote: post #46

This is terrible advice and not something I think people should be recommending to others. I love Joel's posts enough to subscribe to the rss feed (which I have never done for any site ever) but this post is something I strongly disagree with for many good reasons. The idea he puts forth is incredibly naive and has not been taken to its natural conclusion. He talks about the negative side of keeping up with the news…

Not a recipe for ignorance but good advice. Nassim Nicholas Taleb gave almost identical advice years ago: "Don’t read newspapers for the news (just for the gossip and, of course, profiles of authors). The best filter to know if the news matters is if you hear it in cafes, restaurants... or (again) parties." and "If something is going on, I hear about it. I like to talk to people, I socialise. Television is a waste of…

I love Taleb, I've been following his advice for a few years now and have found that absolutely nothing in my life has changed except having a lot more free time and a lot less stress.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#76

Post by mquander »

bpatrianakos wrote: post #67
mquander wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is tuning out the wrong solution? Almost everyone can "get away with being uninformed," because current events have no bearing on most people's lives most of the time. I can name one hundred things that I could learn in twenty minutes which would be more useful to me than reading the morning paper. If something is actually interesting, then news sources which I have meticulously populated with interesting things…

The price is something you described. You prefer to learn from your friends and blogs rather than news outlets. The consensus is that media is useless and biased but it's not so bad that you're better off ignoring it all. Your friends and those bloggers are the same kind of non-experts explaining complicated things as the guy who writes the editorials you just got done criticizing. I'm not knocking your friends or yo…

Allow me to retreat slightly, because the quality of journalism as opposed to other information sources isn't my true objection, and I'd rather not argue about it.

My true objection is the "new" in "news." I have absolutely no interest in current events that aren't directly affecting me. Paul Krugman and Nate Silver are smart people, but if I want to spend my time learning about economics or politics -- which I really am a little bit interested in -- I think it's absurd to read a Paul Krugman column telling me what last month's economic indicators seem to be saying, or to read Nate Silver's analysis of some DNC speeches.

So instead I listen to interviews with economists about work and analysis they've done over the past N years. I find history books that have been retrospectively written by important actors, and those which have stood the test of time. I'd rather hear what Paul Krugman has to say about 2012 in twenty years. That seems like an obviously better use of time than trying to keep up with reporting on current events, which by its nature is inaccurate, incomplete, and filled with ultimately unimportant details.

The only disadvantage is that I don't really have a lot of insight into what's going on in the world right this minute. But I don't understand why that insight is important. I care about learning true, interesting things, not just learning things.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#77

Post by gathly »

giardini wrote: post #55
bpatrianakos wrote: post #46

This is terrible advice and not something I think people should be recommending to others. I love Joel's posts enough to subscribe to the rss feed (which I have never done for any site ever) but this post is something I strongly disagree with for many good reasons. The idea he puts forth is incredibly naive and has not been taken to its natural conclusion. He talks about the negative side of keeping up with the news…

Not a recipe for ignorance but good advice. Nassim Nicholas Taleb gave almost identical advice years ago: "Don’t read newspapers for the news (just for the gossip and, of course, profiles of authors). The best filter to know if the news matters is if you hear it in cafes, restaurants... or (again) parties." and "If something is going on, I hear about it. I like to talk to people, I socialise. Television is a waste of…

but your friend or acquaintance will have heard it from "the news", so it will be the same as watching it yourself as far as being informative, and without looking into the issue yourself, you'll be unable to offer counter-arguments to your friends who are parroting the mainstream news.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#78

Post by gathly »

bpatrianakos wrote: post #46

This is terrible advice and not something I think people should be recommending to others. I love Joel's posts enough to subscribe to the rss feed (which I have never done for any site ever) but this post is something I strongly disagree with for many good reasons. The idea he puts forth is incredibly naive and has not been taken to its natural conclusion. He talks about the negative side of keeping up with the news…

I agree with this. In order to be a citizen of a democracy, you need to be informed. Most things require research and listening to different points of view. They can't just be reasoned out. They require paying attention. Most of what you hear in mainstream or most any news will be noise, but there are bits in the stream that you need to sift out in order to participate in the government of your society.

Of course, democracies around the world are flawed, and being informed about the world will not necessarily lead to change, but being uninformed about the world will necessarily lead to change for the worse. Being a citizen of a democracy is about more than voting every few years. It's a full-time responsibility, and if you just take yourself out of it, you lose it.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#79

Post by adrianbravo »

bpatrianakos wrote: post #73
quesera wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That argument can go both ways. Some people, on a steady diet of noise, are even less able to discern sense from nonsense. Anchoring and all that. When the national news was 30 minutes every night, maybe there was time between that and the next 'cast to assimilate and critically consider what you heard. Nowadays, if you're thinking about the news, you're less than a click away from the next iteration of someone else'…

I feel like everyone is taking what I said to be an extreme opinion. I'm not arguing for daily monitoring of the the news. I'm not advancing the exact opposite of what Joel suggests. I'm suggesting something very moderate. So yeah, checking in every week or two works. That's fine. Religiously following news is just as bad as not following any news. So we can agree on that part - the checking in part. I'm not sure how…

> It certainly can be and these days it's doing more harm than good but part of what was great about the news is that it took the burden of thinking away from people.

This is absurd.

Re: The power of ignoring mainstream news

#80

Post by jberryman »

kiba wrote: post #35

One of the problem that the OP blog points out is that mainstream news dish out bad news that encourage an exaggerated and wraped fearful worldview. For example, when a mass murder incident happens, people talk a lot about gun violence and how it's gripping the country and we should do something about it. Of course, they forgot that 40K people die in car accidents, 600K more die of heart disease and about 500K more d…

You are aware that gun deaths are on course to exceed auto deaths this year? While the gov. has spent billions over decades to prevent auto deaths, cancer deaths, etc., effectively $0 have been spent to study and prevent gun deaths; how is it irrational to be concerned about that?
Post reply on HN