Nassim Taleb, in his incerto, makes the argument that: - Most news is actually entertainment disguised as information. - You can't act on the vast majority of news. - Most medias, including specialized ones, can give a very good appearance of competence while actually knowing nothing of the actual situation. - Medias, of course, have agendas and allegiances. - You don't have neither the skill nor the resources to ver…
Stop Reading News (2013)
61–63 of 63 posts
Re: Stop Reading News (2013)
#62Sigh. Why is it that people seem to think that the only alternative to one bad thing on a continuum is a bad thing at the opposite end of the continuum. There's a lot of room between "obsessively read everything" and "you didn't know about the tornado warning until your house blew over". I get that it's hard to find the best spot on the continuum. And that best spot is probably not the same for everyone. It's interes…
>It's interesting that this article was written 10 years ago. Oh, you will definitely enjoy this quote! Try to guess when it was written. (Warning: there is a spoiler in the replies.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38610428
I guess this shouldn't be surprising: news publishers have to pay their staff and keep the lights on, and always to some extent will be biased toward journalism that sells.
But also consider that Jefferson is on the side of the state: even if he was in favor of freedom of the press, I'm sure he had his own biases that made him think journalists could be annoying, at best.
Re: Stop Reading News (2013)
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
News become part of history but I don't think history is the integral of old news. To think about things maybe dear to us, the history of Apple, Steve Jobs, Amiga, Atari, is very different than the integral of news about those. It is more influenced by people's stories that were never "news". I'm not sure any news about these really constitute a major part of what we'd call the history there. https://en.wikipedia.org…
> A lot of news is just PR. It seems like the distinction between PR and news as content is clear though, and their conflation is from being published together > News become part of history but I don't think history is the integral of old news. Certainly not; so my mental model can be amended: History ~= integration(old news + X) dt And my question then is what to use as X?
I think your point is that some PR is officially PR but that's not what I'm talking about.