3 ms·
The problem is that most of news in itself is and always will be junk. Profound messages do not owe their value to novelty. If you take the time to read the new
by Kenji 11y ago
The problem is that most of news in itself is and always will be junk. Profound messages do not owe their value to novelty. If you take the time to read the newspaper and instead read a book about, I don't know, calculus, every day, you will lean much, much more.
- free2rhyme214 11y agoThis is spot on. I don't believe the hype with Medium. The news will always be junk. You can centralize it and make it prettier on medium - but it's still centralized pretty junk.
- stegosaurus 11y agoIndeed. I wouldn't even really say 'most' of the news. Unless you're in high finance or a journalist, it really is just trivia. Weather forecasts and crosswords are probably the best bits. For the rest, you're better off reading classic novels, all scandals are history playing itself. It feels a bit 'tragedy of the commons' to me. It's important that someone is reading the news (because otherwise democracy falls apart). But my personal utility is maximised by reading a book about tax law rather than an article about the Panama Papers.
- qznc 11y agoI agree, for your personal development news is not important. However, this is how the big entities (countries, enterprises, etc) move. For example, watch the Panama Papers effect in Iceland and England. Social networks are ok to move news around, but centralized media is more efficient to reach the masses.
- draw_down 11y agoExcellent point.
- matt4077 11y agoNews are, however, the source from which most 'profound messages' are distilled. While it doesn't really hurt a single individual to stop reading the news, if large parts of society do so, democracy no longer has the substance it needs to operate. Also: judging by the amount self-righteousness in this thread, HN readers would never consume 'fast-food-content', read 'a calculus book per day' and see through all the marketing spin. All while compulsively reloading HN, probably.
- draw_down 11y agoWould a cigarette smoker who tells you not to smoke be a hypocrite? Yeah. But they would also be correct.
- Kenji 11y agoHah, my bad, I worded that poorly. I didn't mean an entire calculus book per day. That would be absolute madness (well, at least if you calculate along with all the proofs). I mean a few pages of a calculus book every day instead of a few pages of newspaper ;) And I read hackernews not because of the news articles but because of the value of the hackernews comments, though I agree, it is somewhat hypocritical, I also read the news sometimes.
- matt4077 11y agoI know – sorry for making fun of that wording. Comment threads like this just get the worst of me. Having worked in journalism, I don't quite understand the disregard (hate?) for the profession, esp. considering how reasonable HN usually seems to be.
- Kenji 11y agoNo problem. I don't hate journalism. Contrary to the second part of my original comment, I actually worded the first part quite carefully, take note of the word 'most' and that I do not say that news cannot be profound. I don't disregard journalism, there are some journalists who I hold in very high esteem. The problem is a classic one: Journalists have a job to write up things. They seek out information and make an article out of it. This is very difficult to do right since most interesting articles emerge from an inverse process: That the writer learned or acquired valuable information first and later feels the need to share it. This kind of writing has a higher probability to contain anything of value.