Live data from Hacker News

How Millennials Get News

americanpressinstitute.org

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: How Millennials Get News

#51
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trolls are reinforcing the bubble by "proving" that everyone outside of it is purely an asshole with no intent to have a conversation, merely to insult and ridicule and try to cause people to leave the forum.

The problem is the labeling of them as trolls, is what I meant. There is no such thing as trolls, that person you call a troll is making a joke or making a point and you're too far inside your own bubble to not call them an asshole.

No, the person who's harassing someone for being different isn't making a joke or a point. They're harassing someone for being different.

People who try to make others commit suicide don't have a valid point.

Re: How Millennials Get News

#52
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody needs the people who harass others and attempt to ridicule them into silence.

Incorrect without further qualification. There are people in the set of "others" who very much deserve harassment and ridicule--consider people actively working against the common good, like Scientologists or other online trolls or robber barons or city bosses.

Internet trolls are the people who dox others and drive them to suicide.

We can achieve more without them than with them.

Re: How Millennials Get News

#53
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the old days 1994, there was at least some journalistic content on the news with Peter Jennings. And people from a prior generation laughed at the idea of Peter Jennings being 'journalistic' and pinned their ideals on Brinkley and Huntley. Basically, this statement says nothing and means nothing, because it's just a generational marker, nothing more.

That's a total gloss-over. Broadcast news started out as an FCC mandate for licensing purpose, and a differentiator where more quality made a difference in the performance of the network. As the number of channels increased and mandates decreased, they shifted to a more "entertainy" format to keep viewers. This stuff is all available online. Look at the information density of a random broadcast in 1965, 1975, etc. Si…

> Broadcast news started out as an FCC mandate for licensing purpose, and a differentiator where more quality made a difference in the performance of the network.

Given the history of news, this is very doubtful, unless you define 'quality' as 'more entertaining'.

Re: How Millennials Get News

#54
post #28
post #6

Let's be real here, national mainstream electronic media is somewhere between outright propaganda (yesterday's revelation and pictures of ISIS cross dressing soldiers retreating) and inane press release political fodder (sources in the White House report some BS that everyone knew anyway), and tabloid stuff. In the old days 1994, there was at least some journalistic content on the news with Peter Jennings. If you giv…

> In the old days 1994, there was at least some journalistic content on the news with Peter Jennings. And people from a prior generation laughed at the idea of Peter Jennings being 'journalistic' and pinned their ideals on Brinkley and Huntley. Basically, this statement says nothing and means nothing, because it's just a generational marker, nothing more.

Why was this downvoted?

Re: How Millennials Get News

#55
post #38
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> News has been able to sell itself with the dictum that you "have to know what's happening!" Yeah. A couple years ago when I was about 24, I decided I "should be more informed" because that's what adults do, so I bought a year subscription to Minneapolis's major newspaper with the goal of reading it mostly every day. I did for a while, but quickly realised that I didn't give a shit about almost anything in the paper…

I don't care about how the war in Iraq is going.... I don't care how many people are dying in a genocide on the other side of the world. I am sure this is not quite how you mean it, but to me this comes across as saying "if it doesn't affect my life, or my friends, then who cares." You should care about things that don't directly impact your life -- partly because you can make a difference in these things, sometimes,…

No the parent comment is right.

Aligning your circle of influence and circle of concern is the key to productivity and happiness.

Moral fashion is all the rage, but unless you are going to engage in the political process (properly, not just retweeting hashtags or sticking bumper stickers) then you're better off not bothering with it. People spend far too much energy on fashionable 'global' causes when there are a pile of local causes that need their help.

Re: How Millennials Get News

#56
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Managing to challenge ones preconceptions is always going to take work. Also note that for someone getting their news from FOX News, the New York Times is a left-wing outlier. News is pretty terrible in Norway too, but I always feel like I'm in a sitcom whenever I visit the US/Canada. Where BBC and the Guardian appear as bastions against the establishment -- while they of course are very much mainstream. On the other…

http://slashdot.org/ ?

It certainly is a different echo chamber than hn... but with some overlap. I was think more in the direction of general news, not tech news.

Re: How Millennials Get News

#57
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the labeling of them as trolls, is what I meant. There is no such thing as trolls, that person you call a troll is making a joke or making a point and you're too far inside your own bubble to not call them an asshole.

No, the person who's harassing someone for being different isn't making a joke or a point. They're harassing someone for being different. People who try to make others commit suicide don't have a valid point.

Okay. I believe you.

I'm not familiar with those.

The sorts of things I've seen are more like Berta Lovejoy / Doritan Cheeto.

Re: How Millennials Get News

#58
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect without further qualification. There are people in the set of "others" who very much deserve harassment and ridicule--consider people actively working against the common good, like Scientologists or other online trolls or robber barons or city bosses.

Internet trolls are the people who dox others and drive them to suicide. We can achieve more without them than with them.

I suppose we both could have said "some" eh.
Post reply on HN