13 ms·

In 2017, I’m going to stop watching the news

183 points by Mojah 10y ago

simonw 10y ago
As someone living in the USA, I understand the temptation to do this - but now really isn't the right time to turn ostrich. Staying educated on what's going on feels very important to me right now - especially in order to keep an eye out for opportunities to make a positive impact. Classic quote comes to mind: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
- StavrosK 10y ago
  What are some of these opportunities?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - rch 10y ago
    I'm getting more involved with local policy and an environmental groups, and hosting events for similarly motivated people.
    - StavrosK 10y ago
      Can you not do that without watching the news, though?
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
- bigtunacan 10y ago
  Do you have plans to actually respond with some kind of positive action? Just reading the news is akin to doing nothing. To be clear this is not a jab, rather the observation that this is how most of us will respond. I read the news then I think, "How awful and depressing." Then I go back to my normal day only slightly more down.
  - coldpie 10y ago
    I doubled my monthly donation to the ACLU and will now go back to ostriching.
  - matt4077 10y ago
    Democracy kind of depends on people knowing what's going on. If people just show up on election day and choose the prettiest name there's absolutely no incentive to do anything as a politician.
    - bigtunacan 10y ago
      Personally, I keep up with the news, but I understand the author's position. The news is mostly depressing stuff I can't do anything about or it reads like an editorial piece that I'm left wondering what the truth is.
    - icebraining 10y ago
      Playing Devil's advocate, what if one simply votes based on what's going on around them? Not reading the news doesn't imply you're secluded from the rest of society, especially if one uses the free time to make an effort to take a more active interest outside of one's bubble.
    - ashark 10y ago
      Takes 5 minutes of skimming campaign sites and the first page of google results, tops, to pick the least-horrible candidate among the (if you're lucky) two viable ones for a given election at the state or national level in the US, assuming you haven't picked up enough by cultural osmosis to make the decision with no further effort. Local elections are a different matter, but closely following state and national policy and politics is a fairly useless hobby (so it's fine to do so if you enjoy it!) for most people, unless they plan to get much more seriously involved in the process than voting and maybe stuffing envelopes for someone. Or if they have some kind of need for deep knowledge of that stuff for business reasons, I guess, but few have such a need.
  - sanderjd 10y ago
    I agree that this is a problem. I have been paying attention to the news on executive appointments that require confirmation, because I have a Republican senator I can call to encourage him to brave the populist backlash and stand up for his values in those votes.
- crapolasplatter 10y ago
  I stopped watching the MSM news propaganda years ago along with websites that don't allow direct comments to the stories. I would say the MSM is the worst way to stay educated. I find that some of the alternative sites where everyone beats themselves over the topic with opposing views far better method to dissect the truth (middle-ground) than from a MSM news source. Also helps that I don't constraint my thinking and views by boxing myself into one political ideology over another. I also don't do social media news and couldn't be happier.
- rixrax 10y ago
  Dropping cable and not watching CNN, Fox, or what ever your preference would be hardly counts as 'turning ostrich'. That would imply that cable news actually had some value beyond entertainment. Which, I think can be argued it hasn't. And in fact staying 'educated on what's going on' should probably be achieved some other ways and medias - especially if being 'educated' is the keyword here.
  - simonw 10y ago
    Completely agree, cable news is mostly worthless. The headline of the linked article uses the word "watch" but the actual article talks about avoiding other sources as well.
- steelbird 10y ago
  That line was quoted in one of the more recent Batman movies. Takeaway: be more like Batman.
- h1d 10y ago
  > Staying educated on what's going on feels very important to me When people randomly talk about random news that they don't even remember the next day or some celebrity news that have no impact on him/her whatsoever, I'd feel that the person isn't really focused on his/her life. I've ditched TV for 10 years but do read headlines on national news site daily at least to catch what's going on generally but otherwise spending time for myself that's supposed to matter more than "following" the world which is very unproductive.
Kenji 10y ago
The problem with not watching the news is that when you socialise with other people, your discussions will be one long string of Aleppo moments ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOT_BoGpCn4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOT_BoGpCn4 ) because the newspapers pick some random thing and make it super important, shaping the discourse of people while completely ignoring other events that are just as important if not more important.
wenderen 10y ago
Rolf Dobelli's "Avoid News" articles are very relevant here. http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Part1_TEXT.pdf http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Par... http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Part2_FAQs.pdf http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Par...
BatFastard 10y ago
I can totally sympathize with the feeling you are having. Mainstream news has become too celebrity oriented and sensational for my tastes. So what I think I really want is better news. The PBS news is more suited to my tastes, but the form is too long for my available time. Some news is visual, most can be auditory. And it needs to be portable and always available.
- emodendroket 10y ago
  Shit, if only someone came up with some way to get news on your phone, that would be perfect.
beezle 10y ago
After 2008 I dropped cable. This is sometimes a hassle for sports, but otherwise it has been a boon. No more MSNBC, FOX, CNN talking head non-sense 24/7. That stuff just sucks you in and pounds you into submission, whether on political topics or "omg the world is gonna end!" type stuff. I do still scan the headlines from news.google.com once or twice a day and only read a story if the topic is truly compelling/news worthy. This allows me to still have some clue about whats going on without the agita and time sink.
Xcelerate 10y ago
I find that my personal happiness is a lot higher if I don't watch the news. I tend to be a rather analytical person who obsesses over ideas, and I find that ruminating over news or politics drains my energy. Thinking about math or science for a few hours energizes me, but doing the same for social issues wears me out. Part of the problem is that I feel most people underestimate the enormous complexity of social issues. There's so many variables and so many different types of interactions that my opinion on a lot of issues is "I don't have enough information" or "it's too complex for me to pick a side". A lot of people get upset if you say this to them though, and then they attempt to persuade you otherwise using some well-known argument that I've already researched in depth and found to be largely inconclusive. It's easier just to abstain from these conversations. I don't think the average person actually likes exploring topics in extreme depth to figure out "the truth"; the surface level conversation is much more interesting to them. How many people have actually looked at the original studies on climate change themselves? I have a hard time imagining how anyone who actually reads these studies could possibly deny the occurrence of global warming. Strong opinions based on weak data seems to be the prevailing theme lately, but perhaps that's just my perception.
- yaseer 10y ago
  "Thinking about math or science for a few hours energizes me, but doing the same for social issues wears me out." I feel exactly the same way. I can't tell if this is an introvert trait, or whether it arises from the kind of problem your mind is attuned to solving (perhaps both). Reading social news makes me pessimistic for the future, and feel more withdrawn from the world. Reading about mathematics or science excites me, makes me more optimistic for the future, and makes me want to engage with as much as possible.
  - innocentoldguy 10y ago
    I would guess it is an introvert trait. I believe introverts are emotionally drained by activities that involve other people, and are energized by activities that don't.
- arglebarnacle 10y ago
Cacti 10y ago
I don't read the news to, as the author suggested we should, _feel better_ or get some warm cozy feeling. I read it to stay informed and cognizant about what is going on around me, the impact of the actions (or lack) of my community/state/nation, and to keep aware of trends, so that I can make better decisions that affect me _and others_. The news is not entrainment, it's _news_. Yes it can be exhausting sometimes, and yes it can be hard to get out of an echo chamber, and yes some news is just ad-driven BS, but that is part of life. Sticking your head in the sand is not life. And BTW, I'm not advocating 24/7 immersion. Short breaks are fine, just don't go shunning the world... you do live there after all. And if you're getting sick of the same stories, read another source! There's only about a zillion newspapers, journals, letters, etc out there. There's more than enough to keep your interest if you don't glob into cable news all day.
- jasonthevillain 10y ago
  Yes. There _is_ a duty to be informed, but it's not important how. You don't need twitter or cable news--you may be better informed without both, honestly. And there's definitely a value is slowing down and avoiding the bottomless pit.
- ThrustVectoring 10y ago
  >so that I can make better decisions that affect me _and others_. Name three? I suspect it feels more like it's useful than it actually is, and you'd get much of the same information second-hand anyways.
jankotek 10y ago
One hour per week seems like just enough time to spend on general news.
ulrikrasmussen 10y ago
Ugh, this is so short-sighted. I get that reading about some of the awful stuff that has happened in past years will make you sad and uncomfortable, but the answer is not to put your head in the sand and ignore them. If you want to feel less depressed, I propose that you stop reading news (and especially commentary) on social media, and instead subscribe to high-quality news outlets such as newspapers. A digital subscription to nytimes is actually pretty cheap.
- wooter 10y ago
  I find NYT to be absurdly biased.
  - matt4077 10y ago
    The WSJ, then? It's going to be a really dark age when nobody reads the papers that don't dabble in `Pizzagate`-style journalism anymore.
  - ulrikrasmussen 10y ago
    Every news outlet is biased, that's unavoidable. Subscribe to at least one whose bias you agree with, and one you don't. Something that is just as important as getting news is to try to get an understanding of how people who disagree with you think. Try to see things from their perspective and compare it with your own.
    - eeZah7Ux 10y ago
      > Every news outlet is biased ...ranging from slightly to hugely. > Subscribe to at least one whose bias you agree with, and one you don't. Yet you'll have zero guarantee that any number of outlets you pick will cover the whole spectrum. They might very well span a very small spectrum.
mirekrusin 10y ago
Some years ago people started saying "the only thing constant is change". I think it's not true anymore. The "change" seems to be advancing as well. There's so much information coming in - and it's getting faster. In reality like this, once pejorative "ignorance" becomes unavoidable description of every person. There's no way of not being ignorant on most things novadays. Even in narrow specialisations like web dev for example - each developer is ignorant of majority of web dev projects out there. And you can't blame anybody, there's just too much stuff out there. And that's only their narrow specialisation. There's also the rest of the world with billions of ideas and problems to be solved. But you know, "the show must go on", we can focus on interesting things for us (ourselves), "keep calm and carry on" in sustainable-happiness we create (ourselves). Switching off news is probably one of the first steps. There are more, but let's just ignore them for now...
photoatomic 10y ago
already done since 2015, I live better than ever.
photoatomic 10y ago
already done since 2015, I live better than ever.
snake117 10y ago
I've done something similar. I have stopped watching the mainstream national news networks, namely ABC World News and similar programs. I watched these for a little over a year and after awhile you realize just how little informative news they have to offer. Take ABC World News for instance, they throw the big headlines in the beginning, which you already know if you've checked any other news site/app. Then, they have these stories on a major car accident or one house somewhere catching on fire and somehow that merits it being on the national news. I obviously have some amount of sympathy for what these people go through, but the name of the program is ABC World News, and yet, there are never any stories about anything outside the US. And don't even get me started about the amount of commercials they throw in. For sometime I was contemplating about not keeping up with the news for similar reasons that the author stated; certain stories may not interest me and the inevitable realization that there isn't anything I can do about it and making you feel depressed. I found, however, that I like staying informed on what is going on, not only in my local area and the US, but also international affairs. I try to limit my intake of mainstream news through my local paper, BBC World news, and their app; that's it. It doesn't take a lot of my time (maybe 45 minutes in total), I get to be informed on important topics, and see it as a productive way to take a break from school/work.
coreyp_1 10y ago
"Watching" is a very low-bandwidth way to consume news. I stopped watching about 8 years ago. I'm glad to see that the rest of the world has caught on! FWIW, I generally know about everything a day before it hits the major news outlets. After being freed from the slow, commercial-filled news cycle of tv and radio, who would ever want to go back to such a slow delivery system?
- h1d 10y ago
  TV news is such a joke, in 20 minutes you get to see 1 important topic of the day and a couple random things you don't even want to know about in a hope that they will tell you something interesting which will not be the case. Using the web you can narrow that down to 5 minutes without occupying your mind memory too much to something uninteresting which I think is important to keep some room to fill in or use for your creativity. Also for other reasons that TVs are not productive, I ditched that thing 10 years ago after getting out of college. Never missed it.
andreygrehov 10y ago
I stopped watching TV and reading news 5+ years ago. I don't have cable, Netflix subscription or anything like that. Most interestingly, I worked for The Huffington Post for 6 years. During this whole period, I probably read maybe 4-5 articles in total. For me, such attitude results to care about things that concern me or my family only. Sometimes people tell me the latest crazy news, like the airplane crash. Of course, most of the time they are surprised of my unawareness. I believe, there are pros and cons to this behavior. I'm less stressed for sure. I remember someone once told me that I live in my own world where there are no wars and everything is great. I personally consider it as a good thing. As for the cons, – I'm less awared of the latest world news and when my colleagues discuss yet another tragedy, I'm the worst interlocutor. But, that gives me a chance to ask questions. People like questions. At that point, it always helps to view any situation from the side, more objectively I would say. I do read a lot of Hacker News, paper(!) books and a little bit of reddit.
- untog 10y ago
  Do you vote in elections and the like? If so, how do you choose a candidate/party to vote for?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - andreygrehov 10y ago
    I never voted in my life. I live in US for 4 years now, but not allowed to vote _yet_. I do not believe in the voting system. In my opinion, people's choice for one or another candidate/party is directly dependent on this candidate's marketing efforts. It doesn't make any sense, since one can be a "bad" guy by nature, but then good marketing does the trick and afterwards people vote for him/her. Some sort of a karma/rating system would probably work better, i.e. you are not allowed to run your campaign, until you collect 500 points. This approach would require candidates to merit the campaign first and require them to be "good" guys during their entire career.
    - 10y ago
Clubber 10y ago
I would recommend instead of completely ignoring the news, just stick to the 30 minute national news on CBS/ABC/NBC/NPR (maybe FOX). Everything that happens in the world in a day will fit in 30 minutes. Everything else is mostly opinion and speculation which serves the writers more than you.
- tunap 10y ago
  Scannng headlines in RSS feeds from a dozen or so sources gives me a glimpse of the state of world events in under 10 minutes. I rarely open TFAs unless it is a topic that is of particular interest to, or directly affects, me. Then I come to HN comments for non-clickbait sources and insights into topics I do care about.
  - Clubber 10y ago
    I do that too, but I have to keep in mind that most headlines are sensational. HN comments are great.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
overcast 10y ago
I stopped being involved with social media in 2015, no news in 2017 sounds like a good next step.
sandworm101 10y ago
When the artists and revolutionaries disconnect other forces run rampant. When everything is horrible, this is when we most need the thinkers to remain focused. You dont make the world better by ignoring its problems. If politics is depressing, get involved and make it less so.
teaneedz 10y ago
Agreed. I stopped reading the general news this year too. I feel better.
insickness 10y ago
I get most of my news through social media. I find social media to be even worse than just news in terms of polluting my brain, shortening my attention span and wasting my time. I now try to stay off social media until noon every day, which was a suggestion from someone on this forum. The peace it brings to my mornings is fantastic. And once I do get on social media, I'm much less likely to binge.
libeclipse 10y ago
This seems to be concentrating on devoting your time to things (be it news, donations, events, initiatives) that make YOU feel better, rather than anything else. Weigh that against your personal beliefs and ethics before you start following what this article says.
bredren 10y ago
I also stopped watching / reading news, on or around November 16th. I thought Apple Watch had made me use my phone less, but this change has increased the amount of attention I have by a ton. My primary news outlets were G News and Twitter. I had to quit using twitter as well, which has been somewhat of a bummer as I've had tweet ideas. But I just let them pass now because it is more valuable to not have the distraction of reading others. I also have been keeping up on tech news, primarily Apple rumors and here on hacker news. Also, Reddit and various subreddits offer largely 'news free' content for when I just want to consume. If anything, these new filters have helped me see that most 'news' is really just content. And at least for now, I'm not interested in content that makes me feel bad or steals attention from my life.
- emodendroket 10y ago
  So you don't have time to know even the basic outlines of current affairs or politics but you do have time to obsessively follow Apple rumors? Does it not bother you to have such narrow interests?
legodt 10y ago
In the US and Europe now is a very dangerous time to give up on news. Cables news should be dropped, but I'm seeing in the comments here a few people ardently against all news. Considering that a white nationalist backed candidate is in-office with full party support starting this year, ignoring the news is a luxury only affordable to the rich white male class. Everybody else is affected.
- stephenboyd 10y ago
  Unless you live in a total dictatorship, it's selfish to be completely disinterested in what's going on in the world. We don't actually live in that dictatorship yet here in the US, and the actions and expressed preferences of common citizens are still influential in politics, especially if you care enough to call up your legislators and write to your newspapers. We are the cast, not the audience.
  - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    >We don't actually live in that dictatorship yet here in the US, and the actions and expressed preferences of common citizens are still influential in politics, especially if you care enough to call up your legislators and write to your newspapers. We are the cast, not the audience. Many people participate, and push back, but we can see which way the wind is blowing. Dictatorship? Well, maybe not outright dictatorship, but certainly heavy authoritarianism along the lines of Putin and Erdogan.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  I follow the news, but I also need to get to work on efforts to move somewhere else. My wife is completely terrified of moving far-away from family, but of course, I'm rather terrified of living under a fascist state.
  - legodt 10y ago
    I don't know where you live or how hypothetically fucked you are, but it isn't too late to give a little of your time to get involved in local politics and fight back! No guilting or judgement, just trying to keep a positive mood as a lot of times these "escape plans" don't work out for various reasons
StClaire 10y ago
I spent the last year getting 95% of my news from The Economist's leaders and the world this week. Did I know about every mass shooting soon after it happened? No. But I spent a half hour a week and could speak reasonably competently about the election. More importantly: the news didn't consume me like it swallowed some of my friends
- emodendroket 10y ago
  Yeah, and you also got all your information about the world filtered through the Economist's extremely ideological lens.
  - stevedonovan 10y ago
    Once you know their agenda, you can filter. At least they're not hysterical. Part of the problem is the very different meaning that the word 'liberal' has in the UK.
    - emodendroket 10y ago
      Filtering can't tell you what they leave out.
acchow 10y ago
From observation, it also seems that people feel great about themselves and have done their part as a citizen of humanity after reading news, "being informed" (and maybe a share on FB). I don't have data to prove it, but it seems intuitive that this results in them taking less real action?
- webwanderings 10y ago
  I think the opposite is true. You'd feel better if you stop watching news of far away consequences (national/world) and stop sharing what you think you want to share. You'll feel better eventually. The OP is absolutely correct on all the observations. I have been doing the same for a while: only monitor local news; don't bother sharing. And since most people on social media do not follow the same, I have stopped following social media. The difficult part initially is when you stop sharing (because you're fighting your ego) but eventually you'll see how it makes you even more productive than you are.
- emodendroket 10y ago
  How are you supposed to "take action" if you aren't even aware of what's happening?
imgabe 10y ago
I've taken this up as well and expanded to just watching less TV in general. I find myself always saying I don't have enough time to do all the things I want to do, yet I manage to watch an astounding amount of TV. The solution is obvious.
jaunkst 10y ago
I stopped a few years ago. If its important it will find its way to you.
paulpauper 10y ago
agree. the news is a waste of time http://greyenlightenment.com/why-the-news-is-still-mostly-pointless/ http://greyenlightenment.com/why-the-news-is-still-mostly-po... Some say the 'only constant is change'. It's actually the opposite: things seldom change, with the exception of a few blips here and there(such as 911 and the 2008 financial crisis). As further evidence of how things tend to remain constant more often than not, the post-2009 bull market and economic expansion is the longest ever despite the endless predictions of recession and crisis. Same for failed predictions of hyperinflation and dollar collapse. Web 2.0 valuations still keep rising long after pundits in 2012 said it was a bubble. There's still war and terror in the Middle East despite trillion of dollars thrown at the problem Self-improvement is more important than worrying about things outside of your control or that have little impact on your life. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are going to throw you a lifeline. That you have to do on your own, such as by investing your income in stocks or real estate and being frugal.
- h1d 10y ago
  > Self-improvement is more important than worrying about things outside of your control or that have little impact on your life. Can't be said better.
- discombobulate 10y ago
  do you have a twitter account?
afarrell 10y ago
One minor goal for me this year is to ignore most of the news and focus mainly on one specific topic that I can learn to a useful level. I think I'm going to choose the US veterans administration. Why? 1) Having moved US -> UK, I wish the US had something like the NHS. 2) I've heard multiple veterans decry the quality and responsiveness of the VA healthcare is some pretty drastic terms. 3) I know from Rep. Capuano's mailing list the GOP has been trying for years to reform Ye VA in some way. I suspect that until people stop being unhappy with the VA, that a large chunk of Americans will associate government-run healthcare with incompetence and inefficiency. This stands in stark contrast to the British perception of the NHS, so I want to know what's up.
- canadian_voter 10y ago
  The National Health Service? That's communism, silly. And communism is bad. More seriously, the American people just don't trust their government to be competent or efficient. Only about 20% describe government programs as "well-run."[0] Although more than 50% seem to think that it's doing an okay job on health care at the moment. It would be an incredible undertaking to establish something like the NHS in the US, and the political will just isn't there. [0] http://www.people-press.org/2015/11/23/beyond-distrust-how-americans-view-their-government/ http://www.people-press.org/2015/11/23/beyond-distrust-how-a...
  - keithpeter 10y ago
    The NHS is actually organised as a large number of locally managed nodes. Doctor's practices (GPs) are self-governing to some extent, and hospitals are managed by trusts. There has been a lot of reorganisation recently (the Tories always reorganise the NHS, it is a thing they do). My knowledge of the US is limited but I imagine that a US version of the NHS would be organised by state and then by district hospitals. Plenty of moving parts at the back end but at least the patient just sees the single payer front end.
    - afarrell 10y ago
      Also there are commissioning groups? I also want to look into how the NHS works in more detail.
kayman 10y ago
It's key to differentiate between watching the news and being informed. I haven't watched the news in over a decade (except for when I'm over at someone's house being polite) and my life has been better because of it. Instead, I pay for NYTimes, Wall St Journal and read Hacker news which I find keeps me more informed than the average joe watching news stories on "what's trending on social media" type journalism.
emodendroket 10y ago
Is this a parody or something? I guess it'd explain a lot about HN if there are a lot of people on here who only read about start-ups and JavaScript frameworks and never look at other kinds of news.
ajaimk 10y ago
Mattias nails it - I've been doing this for about 3 years now and everytime I'm in public and see CNN or Fox News on TV, I cringe and reinforce my belief. On top of Hackers News, Facebook, Twitter and the Daily Show, I still tune into Bloomberg sometimes which is the closest I get to traditional News. I do have to give them props for taking a good spin on real world events (like major natural disasters) and talking about them about the impact they have on the world after they occur vs just non-stop clips of people suffering. This might seem harsh but a few people being killed by a terrorist makes no difference in the grand scheme of things - 4 days on non-stop talk about it on the News just increases paranoia and concern. Always had the idea that the 24 hour news cycle would be a lot better if they just balanced it out with puppy videos to restore our faith in humanity. Funny story - Opened the CNN app the other day to read about the Christmas incident in Germany - 17 links that basically ruin all faith in humanity - The last one (18th) was extremely clickbaity but the only one that was positive. The headline: "Bill Gates was her Secret Santa" - It's like you can't get good news without Tech being involved somehow.
davidmr 10y ago
I'm conflicted about this. On the one hand I have also decided to become as ignorant as possible about the news because (at the risk of overusing the phrase), I think we have firmly moved into a post-truth American society. If election outcomes aren't based on facts, what's the point of knowing them? On the other hand, many other people in this thread are saying that there's never been a more important time to know the news. I understand the sentiment, but I would phrase it differently: there's never been a more important time for good journalists to be doing good journalism. Except for the tricky issue of how to keep good journalists employed without people reading them, I don't feel any particular obligation to be informed. I decided to donate money to ProPublica in the hope that they'll keep the government as honest as possible without me having to deal with it.
- emodendroket 10y ago
  If a bunch of good journalists are cranking out great investigative reporting but nobody reads it or gives a damn then it will do nothing to "keep the government honest."
  - davidmr 10y ago
    I realize this is a stupid argument, but as long as someone else is reading it, I don't feel like I have to. I'm not recommending everyone stop reading the news, just me.
z5h 10y ago
News is fine. The problem is that most news business models compete for attention via: 1. alarmist content 2. clickbait headlines 3. polarizing viewpoints There aren't as many entities who simply try to deliver balanced news and perspectives. Try reading the Economist, apnews.com, wikinews.org.
- Esau 10y ago
  Exactly. I realized during the run-up to the election that CNN and the other major news networks don't really report news anymore - they exploit it.
rdtsc 10y ago
I went back to watching the news, but as comedy. For a while Fox was the best for that. Really good entertainment with all the stupidity and ridiculousness so it was kind of interesting. Then during the election cycle CNN, NYT, and other major ones joined the ranks. I will always remember the "Reading these document is illegal, it is different for us, the media, so come to use for interpretation". That for me exemplified the new low the mass media has sunk to recently. It is of course useful to re-read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky and keep that in mind then news makes a lot more sense.
hkmurakami 10y ago
Imo you need to avoid social media as well, since headlines enter your mind through your timeline as well.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
jasonlotito 10y ago
This is nothing special. We all do this already. We don't watch or read news from certain sources already, and stick to other ones we come to trust, and this is all the author is doing. I honestly don't see the big deal.
anonu 10y ago
I concur with the author. I've also found that turning off any notifications on popular apps and putting them "out of reach" has also helped tremendously. I removed Instagram from my sorted folders on the front screen of my phone - and I find that I open it much less now - and its for the better. I can only deal with so many stupid memes and mindless rantings and ravings about banal and mediocre things around us. The key question to ask yourself is "Does this improve my life at all?" The answer is mostly no. Maybe one could argue there is some small "entertainment" value. In this case, I would opt for quality over quantity. For example, watching a quality movie for 2 hours rather than spending 2 hours clicking through useless articles and videos.
teddyh 10y ago
Many others have expressed similar sentiments; here’s one very good explanation: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/01/the-low-information-diet/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/01/the-low-informatio...
hacker_9 10y ago
My thoughts: UK News: Getting worse each year, though usually high quality, they go so into murder details these days it makes you sick if you aren't already desensitized. US News: these channels are all a joke, honestly Fox and CNN? I turn to these channels when I want to have a laugh. Reddit/HN: Aggregated news, actually pretty good. Though of course very western focused, Russia is the 'bad guy' etc.
KirinDave 10y ago
I really wish I could vanish back into my tradecraft. I'm am quite jealous of people who can do this. But the year I came out as non-binary is the same year my country elected a President with a VP candidate that wants to make discrimination against me not only legal but protected. E.g., under Pence's prior proposals someone could fire me because I am NB to "protect their moral conviction" and even if that firing was against corporate policy it could not be punished or easily recanted. His prior two attempts at the law also were written in a way where local and state laws could not override the federal law, which makes it even scarier. So I actually need to watch the news and remain "plugged in" because it's very much a situation for me where I am now exposed to a lot of potential damage. As such I do not feel that burying my head in the proverbial sand is a luxury I can't afford. For those who can, enjoy it.
- smokeyj 10y ago
  What's the point of being informed if you don't have influence? It's like watching a train wreck while you're tied to the tracks. Knowing the play by play really doesn't matter. It's so progressive to want the government involved in every facet of our lives under the guise of "effective regulation". That is, until, you disagree with the tyrant in charge. Whatever happened to life liberty and the pursuits of happiness? Seems to be pushed aside as libertarian mumbo jumbo. > His prior two attempts at the law also were written in a way where local and state laws could not override Careful now. Supporting states rights will firmly label you as a racist.
  - KirinDave 10y ago
    I'm concerned about my civil rights and not your tedious verbal fencing. Every American should be concerned about the idea of making it legal for police to selectively enforce law based on "moral convictions" about marriage and lifestyle. If you're not concerned about that kind of legislation then I'm not prepared to debate you on such a fundamental tenant on a mobile keyboard. Suffice to say: I'm opposed fundamentally. As for why know about it: be real. We've got a lot more influence than you imply we do. I've got comparatively enormous financial resources to back certain people, along with the ability to finance a defensive emigration attempt.
zorked 10y ago
Being from a country that has commercial news (clickbaity, alarmist, etc.) I'm finding it ok to watch the news from European public TV. You get to know what's going on in the world but avoid most of the emotional drain.
itaysk 10y ago
I've been doing this for a few years now, and I highly recommend. I am still subscribed to various tech news feeds, but haven't watched the TV news edition, or browsed to any news website just to check the news in a very long time. I still get the important news by hearsay, Facebook, work talk, etc. I don't feel like I'm missing anything.
guelo 10y ago
One of the issues I care about is net neutrality and I'm very worried that Trump will repeal it next year. I plan on reading all related read news and to help mobilize the tech community against a repeal. There are many other similar issues that people are gearing up for a fight. Honestly, I think the people that have the luxury of ignoring all news are the privileged and selfish. We have a duty in a democracy to stay informed and join the fray. That's the price of living in a free society. If there is no grassroots involvement then the government ends up being run by the moneyed interests.
- Sgt_Apone 10y ago
  I've found that the solution is somewhat in middle. Burying your head in the sand and pretending everything is grand just makes you ignorant. On the other hand, consuming news everyday is a depressing affair that can warp your worldview in the opposite direction. Personally, I just consume national and international news once a week through more traditional magazines and journals. This usually means I get full reporting on events after they have unfolded and I avoid the hearsay and rumours that cable news loves. The analysis is usually top notch as well. I consume local news daily as local issues tend to affect me more directly, but I don't find it nearly as bad as the internet's daily quest to find the most gruesome national or international news story to spew everywhere. Also avoiding news subreddits and comments sections is key. I like Hacker News because the dialogue is usually pretty good and it's mostly about industry news.
bane 10y ago
I made this commitment in 2016 and don't much tune in. Important events seem to eventually percolate up into my other social discussions and places like here on HN or Facebook and I've found I've missed very few of the broad strokes -- but lots of the details. On the other hand I've also noticed that I seem to be able to approach topics more objectively and less "inflamed" with presupposed positions than before. This all has lowered my stress levels immeasurably and given me much more of a "we'll be fine" attitude about major events. The real problem is that most of the major media sources are terrible, absolute amateur hour bottom of the barrel lowest common denominator garbage. The quality of what passes for journalism these days would get a person fired from almost any other profession. When you find good journalism, it's almost like coming out a coal mine into the fresh air, but it's so hard to find it almost isn't even worth it.
maxander 10y ago
While reducing one's media consumption is a healthy goal, the author has a very odd conception of "making a meaningful difference." Does donating $50 to Red Cross not make a difference? Sure it does- that's $50 that, minus overhead or whatever, can be spent on something like medical care for those who wouldn't otherwise receive it. Its just the same as $50 to your local medical charity, in that respect; for that matter, with Red Cross, the overheads are likely lower (economy of scale and all) so it makes more of a difference. Only you don't get a thank-you card from the kid the next town over whose antibiotics you paid for; if that card is the "meaningful difference" you crave, okay, but otherwise...? Same in other respects, of course. You can make a meaningful difference to things like the Syrian conflict or what-have-you, the issue is that these issues are just so huge that a meaningful difference isn't likely going to be visible. The question is, do you want to make a difference in the world to see yourself being powerful and nice, or for an objective desire to have good effects in the world?
- jstanley 10y ago
  > economy of scale and all As charities get larger, they get more effective at receiving donations. There is no market pressure to make them more effective at utilising donations for their presumed purpose, only the extent to which they can leverage those donations to receive even more donations.
mikebay 10y ago
Facebook, google, twitter and Soros funded media organisations are pushing lies after lies. I have never before thinking that actually Russian news are much more accurate than "main"stream garbage news. Facebook, Google and Twitter are like Obama to world peace.. (Nobel price of peace??) Big threat to world peace. I stop watching garbage media news fev years ago. Big thanks to all "conspiracy" theorists who actually was right about many things. People, please stop believing tv or media sources without doing any your own research. Facebook, Gooogle & Twitter ? - No thanks
pryelluw 10y ago
I stopped years ago. Best decision ever. I also dont really use social media outside of work. My life is muuch much much better.
open-source-ux 10y ago
I understand the sentiment that news is often very depressing but I strongly disagree with the suggestion we should stop reading it. Don't rely on social media for your news. Pick your news sources carefully, read more than one source too. Consider listening to radio if you want to avoid emotive images or screaming headlines. But don't stop reading (or listening to) the news. The Internet makes it possible to read or listen to English language news from sources from around the world. If you are dissatisfied with news in your region or country, go and explore those other sources. And I disagree that you can't do anything about events in the news. Millions of people donate or give money to charity or fundraising campaigns as a result of events in the news. Life isn't comfortable for millions of people around the world, but why insulate yourself from what's happening around you? I can't even begin to imagine what the world would be like if we all stopped reading the news. Knowing what's happening around the world (and your own back yard) has spurred so many people to take action big and small. And even if you think "I'm never going to take action, there's nothing I can do", you can still form an opinion - that might be an important thing when it comes to election day and you have to decide who you vote for. Not being interested in the news is exactly how politicians slip legislation under the nose of the electorate. If you find reading the news depressing, read this for an inspiring story of how a Design & Technology student was spurred into action after watching a harrowing news report on Syria: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29900968 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29900968
dmfdmf 10y ago
Here is an interesting blog post by John D. Cook on how too much news creates an "Inverted Sense of Risk" http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2014/09/05/inverted-sense-of-risk/ http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2014/09/05/inverted-sense-of-r... While I highly recommend not being too connected to the concretes and noise of the day, i.e. news, I think sticking your head in the sand is not such a great idea either. Nobody planned on or set out to design and build tanks, cars, plane, guns, bombs, ciphers or databases for the Nazis but people actually did.
formula_ninguna 10y ago
News disturb you and make anxious. Besides, reading news is no use https://playforitsownsake.com/articles/why-reading-political-news-and-history-is-useless-for-predicting-events https://playforitsownsake.com/articles/why-reading-political...
- tudorw 10y ago
  I'm with you, it's a mantra that takes effort to maintain, I'm easily sucked into a 'serious news' narrative, then mine for background information obsessively so as to form an 'informed opinion', then what, it's formed but neutered, extending my understanding of a topic does nothing to change the situation... my existential inclinations are not well serviced by what I see as a self-indulgent and negative voyeurism, a better reaction, to double down on local, small scale, personal improvements.
mb_72 10y ago
I don't really follow the news where I live (Estonia) but I do check the news and weather for my Australian hometown daily. Why? So I can communicate with my parents about their garden and thoughts on local (to them) matters. It really helps bridge the 14,000km between us.
_Codemonkeyism 10y ago
Not watching TV since more than 5 years (also no Netflix etc.) - blocked every new source except HN at the beginning of 2016 (using leechblock in Firefox). Much happier.
dandare 10y ago
I am not sure what is the right thing to do but I feel not watching the news is not right. I too feel anxious and depressed when I follow the news and politics but I feel that I become part of the problem if I decide to live under the rock. I think the solution should be something like being able to filter the negativity and keep the zen while watching the news, not close the eyes.
Imagenuity 10y ago
I stopped watching the news in the late 90's because of the sensationalization and shallow reporting. I haven't missed it, especially now with the media bias. There are better ways of keeping up to date, especially with news feeds that you can get just the topics you want news on. But people still think I'm nuts for not watching the news.
tempodox 10y ago
s/ostridge/ostrich/ Apart from that, I can only agree. I started on the same path several years ago.
stephenboyd 10y ago
Unless you live in a total dictatorship, it's selfish to be completely disinterested in what's going on in the world, more so if you're personally unaffected by a deluge of horrors happening to others. We don't yet live in that dictatorship here in the US, and the actions and expressed preferences of common citizens are still influential in politics, especially if you care enough to call up your legislators and write to your newspapers. We are the cast, not the audience.
hnbro 10y ago
i'm inclined to think there is no such thing as a "free press". i'm also of a mind that even when one presumes such a thing exists, there's no reason to believe that this leads to "truth" or "reliability" in reporting. i hope there's a third way between corporate news and government news.
bvinc 10y ago
I've decided to stick with "slow media". I'm not going to get my news from 24/7 news channels, or reddit, or Twitter. I'm going to pick a news outlet I trust to give daily facts. I might even subscribe to a physical newspaper. I think a happy medium exists where you can stay informed, but avoid being consumed by bullshit.

183 points by Mojah 10y ago

As someone living in the USA, I understand the temptation to do this - but now really isn't the right time to turn ostrich. Staying educated on what's going on feels very important to me right now - especially in order to keep an eye out for opportunities to make a positive impact. Classic quote comes to mind: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

StavrosK 10y ago
What are some of these opportunities?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- rch 10y ago
  I'm getting more involved with local policy and an environmental groups, and hosting events for similarly motivated people.
  - StavrosK 10y ago
    Can you not do that without watching the news, though?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
bigtunacan 10y ago
Do you have plans to actually respond with some kind of positive action? Just reading the news is akin to doing nothing. To be clear this is not a jab, rather the observation that this is how most of us will respond. I read the news then I think, "How awful and depressing." Then I go back to my normal day only slightly more down.
- coldpie 10y ago
  I doubled my monthly donation to the ACLU and will now go back to ostriching.
- matt4077 10y ago
  Democracy kind of depends on people knowing what's going on. If people just show up on election day and choose the prettiest name there's absolutely no incentive to do anything as a politician.
  - bigtunacan 10y ago
    Personally, I keep up with the news, but I understand the author's position. The news is mostly depressing stuff I can't do anything about or it reads like an editorial piece that I'm left wondering what the truth is.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    Playing Devil's advocate, what if one simply votes based on what's going on around them? Not reading the news doesn't imply you're secluded from the rest of society, especially if one uses the free time to make an effort to take a more active interest outside of one's bubble.
  - ashark 10y ago
    Takes 5 minutes of skimming campaign sites and the first page of google results, tops, to pick the least-horrible candidate among the (if you're lucky) two viable ones for a given election at the state or national level in the US, assuming you haven't picked up enough by cultural osmosis to make the decision with no further effort. Local elections are a different matter, but closely following state and national policy and politics is a fairly useless hobby (so it's fine to do so if you enjoy it!) for most people, unless they plan to get much more seriously involved in the process than voting and maybe stuffing envelopes for someone. Or if they have some kind of need for deep knowledge of that stuff for business reasons, I guess, but few have such a need.
- sanderjd 10y ago
  I agree that this is a problem. I have been paying attention to the news on executive appointments that require confirmation, because I have a Republican senator I can call to encourage him to brave the populist backlash and stand up for his values in those votes.
crapolasplatter 10y ago
I stopped watching the MSM news propaganda years ago along with websites that don't allow direct comments to the stories. I would say the MSM is the worst way to stay educated. I find that some of the alternative sites where everyone beats themselves over the topic with opposing views far better method to dissect the truth (middle-ground) than from a MSM news source. Also helps that I don't constraint my thinking and views by boxing myself into one political ideology over another. I also don't do social media news and couldn't be happier.
rixrax 10y ago
Dropping cable and not watching CNN, Fox, or what ever your preference would be hardly counts as 'turning ostrich'. That would imply that cable news actually had some value beyond entertainment. Which, I think can be argued it hasn't. And in fact staying 'educated on what's going on' should probably be achieved some other ways and medias - especially if being 'educated' is the keyword here.
- simonw 10y ago
  Completely agree, cable news is mostly worthless. The headline of the linked article uses the word "watch" but the actual article talks about avoiding other sources as well.
steelbird 10y ago
That line was quoted in one of the more recent Batman movies. Takeaway: be more like Batman.
h1d 10y ago
> Staying educated on what's going on feels very important to me When people randomly talk about random news that they don't even remember the next day or some celebrity news that have no impact on him/her whatsoever, I'd feel that the person isn't really focused on his/her life. I've ditched TV for 10 years but do read headlines on national news site daily at least to catch what's going on generally but otherwise spending time for myself that's supposed to matter more than "following" the world which is very unproductive.

Kenji 10y ago

The problem with not watching the news is that when you socialise with other people, your discussions will be one long string of Aleppo moments ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOT_BoGpCn4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOT_BoGpCn4 ) because the newspapers pick some random thing and make it super important, shaping the discourse of people while completely ignoring other events that are just as important if not more important.

wenderen 10y ago

Rolf Dobelli's "Avoid News" articles are very relevant here. http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Part1_TEXT.pdf http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Par... http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Part2_FAQs.pdf http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Par...

BatFastard 10y ago

I can totally sympathize with the feeling you are having. Mainstream news has become too celebrity oriented and sensational for my tastes. So what I think I really want is better news. The PBS news is more suited to my tastes, but the form is too long for my available time. Some news is visual, most can be auditory. And it needs to be portable and always available.

emodendroket 10y ago
Shit, if only someone came up with some way to get news on your phone, that would be perfect.

beezle 10y ago

After 2008 I dropped cable. This is sometimes a hassle for sports, but otherwise it has been a boon. No more MSNBC, FOX, CNN talking head non-sense 24/7. That stuff just sucks you in and pounds you into submission, whether on political topics or "omg the world is gonna end!" type stuff. I do still scan the headlines from news.google.com once or twice a day and only read a story if the topic is truly compelling/news worthy. This allows me to still have some clue about whats going on without the agita and time sink.

Xcelerate 10y ago

I find that my personal happiness is a lot higher if I don't watch the news. I tend to be a rather analytical person who obsesses over ideas, and I find that ruminating over news or politics drains my energy. Thinking about math or science for a few hours energizes me, but doing the same for social issues wears me out. Part of the problem is that I feel most people underestimate the enormous complexity of social issues. There's so many variables and so many different types of interactions that my opinion on a lot of issues is "I don't have enough information" or "it's too complex for me to pick a side". A lot of people get upset if you say this to them though, and then they attempt to persuade you otherwise using some well-known argument that I've already researched in depth and found to be largely inconclusive. It's easier just to abstain from these conversations. I don't think the average person actually likes exploring topics in extreme depth to figure out "the truth"; the surface level conversation is much more interesting to them. How many people have actually looked at the original studies on climate change themselves? I have a hard time imagining how anyone who actually reads these studies could possibly deny the occurrence of global warming. Strong opinions based on weak data seems to be the prevailing theme lately, but perhaps that's just my perception.

yaseer 10y ago
"Thinking about math or science for a few hours energizes me, but doing the same for social issues wears me out." I feel exactly the same way. I can't tell if this is an introvert trait, or whether it arises from the kind of problem your mind is attuned to solving (perhaps both). Reading social news makes me pessimistic for the future, and feel more withdrawn from the world. Reading about mathematics or science excites me, makes me more optimistic for the future, and makes me want to engage with as much as possible.
- innocentoldguy 10y ago
  I would guess it is an introvert trait. I believe introverts are emotionally drained by activities that involve other people, and are energized by activities that don't.
arglebarnacle 10y ago

Cacti 10y ago

I don't read the news to, as the author suggested we should, _feel better_ or get some warm cozy feeling. I read it to stay informed and cognizant about what is going on around me, the impact of the actions (or lack) of my community/state/nation, and to keep aware of trends, so that I can make better decisions that affect me _and others_. The news is not entrainment, it's _news_. Yes it can be exhausting sometimes, and yes it can be hard to get out of an echo chamber, and yes some news is just ad-driven BS, but that is part of life. Sticking your head in the sand is not life. And BTW, I'm not advocating 24/7 immersion. Short breaks are fine, just don't go shunning the world... you do live there after all. And if you're getting sick of the same stories, read another source! There's only about a zillion newspapers, journals, letters, etc out there. There's more than enough to keep your interest if you don't glob into cable news all day.

jasonthevillain 10y ago
Yes. There _is_ a duty to be informed, but it's not important how. You don't need twitter or cable news--you may be better informed without both, honestly. And there's definitely a value is slowing down and avoiding the bottomless pit.
ThrustVectoring 10y ago
>so that I can make better decisions that affect me _and others_. Name three? I suspect it feels more like it's useful than it actually is, and you'd get much of the same information second-hand anyways.

jankotek 10y ago

One hour per week seems like just enough time to spend on general news.

ulrikrasmussen 10y ago

Ugh, this is so short-sighted. I get that reading about some of the awful stuff that has happened in past years will make you sad and uncomfortable, but the answer is not to put your head in the sand and ignore them. If you want to feel less depressed, I propose that you stop reading news (and especially commentary) on social media, and instead subscribe to high-quality news outlets such as newspapers. A digital subscription to nytimes is actually pretty cheap.

wooter 10y ago
I find NYT to be absurdly biased.
- matt4077 10y ago
  The WSJ, then? It's going to be a really dark age when nobody reads the papers that don't dabble in `Pizzagate`-style journalism anymore.
- ulrikrasmussen 10y ago
  Every news outlet is biased, that's unavoidable. Subscribe to at least one whose bias you agree with, and one you don't. Something that is just as important as getting news is to try to get an understanding of how people who disagree with you think. Try to see things from their perspective and compare it with your own.
  - eeZah7Ux 10y ago
    > Every news outlet is biased ...ranging from slightly to hugely. > Subscribe to at least one whose bias you agree with, and one you don't. Yet you'll have zero guarantee that any number of outlets you pick will cover the whole spectrum. They might very well span a very small spectrum.

mirekrusin 10y ago

Some years ago people started saying "the only thing constant is change". I think it's not true anymore. The "change" seems to be advancing as well. There's so much information coming in - and it's getting faster. In reality like this, once pejorative "ignorance" becomes unavoidable description of every person. There's no way of not being ignorant on most things novadays. Even in narrow specialisations like web dev for example - each developer is ignorant of majority of web dev projects out there. And you can't blame anybody, there's just too much stuff out there. And that's only their narrow specialisation. There's also the rest of the world with billions of ideas and problems to be solved. But you know, "the show must go on", we can focus on interesting things for us (ourselves), "keep calm and carry on" in sustainable-happiness we create (ourselves). Switching off news is probably one of the first steps. There are more, but let's just ignore them for now...

photoatomic 10y ago

already done since 2015, I live better than ever.

photoatomic 10y ago

already done since 2015, I live better than ever.

snake117 10y ago

I've done something similar. I have stopped watching the mainstream national news networks, namely ABC World News and similar programs. I watched these for a little over a year and after awhile you realize just how little informative news they have to offer. Take ABC World News for instance, they throw the big headlines in the beginning, which you already know if you've checked any other news site/app. Then, they have these stories on a major car accident or one house somewhere catching on fire and somehow that merits it being on the national news. I obviously have some amount of sympathy for what these people go through, but the name of the program is ABC World News, and yet, there are never any stories about anything outside the US. And don't even get me started about the amount of commercials they throw in. For sometime I was contemplating about not keeping up with the news for similar reasons that the author stated; certain stories may not interest me and the inevitable realization that there isn't anything I can do about it and making you feel depressed. I found, however, that I like staying informed on what is going on, not only in my local area and the US, but also international affairs. I try to limit my intake of mainstream news through my local paper, BBC World news, and their app; that's it. It doesn't take a lot of my time (maybe 45 minutes in total), I get to be informed on important topics, and see it as a productive way to take a break from school/work.

coreyp_1 10y ago

"Watching" is a very low-bandwidth way to consume news. I stopped watching about 8 years ago. I'm glad to see that the rest of the world has caught on! FWIW, I generally know about everything a day before it hits the major news outlets. After being freed from the slow, commercial-filled news cycle of tv and radio, who would ever want to go back to such a slow delivery system?

h1d 10y ago
TV news is such a joke, in 20 minutes you get to see 1 important topic of the day and a couple random things you don't even want to know about in a hope that they will tell you something interesting which will not be the case. Using the web you can narrow that down to 5 minutes without occupying your mind memory too much to something uninteresting which I think is important to keep some room to fill in or use for your creativity. Also for other reasons that TVs are not productive, I ditched that thing 10 years ago after getting out of college. Never missed it.

andreygrehov 10y ago

I stopped watching TV and reading news 5+ years ago. I don't have cable, Netflix subscription or anything like that. Most interestingly, I worked for The Huffington Post for 6 years. During this whole period, I probably read maybe 4-5 articles in total. For me, such attitude results to care about things that concern me or my family only. Sometimes people tell me the latest crazy news, like the airplane crash. Of course, most of the time they are surprised of my unawareness. I believe, there are pros and cons to this behavior. I'm less stressed for sure. I remember someone once told me that I live in my own world where there are no wars and everything is great. I personally consider it as a good thing. As for the cons, – I'm less awared of the latest world news and when my colleagues discuss yet another tragedy, I'm the worst interlocutor. But, that gives me a chance to ask questions. People like questions. At that point, it always helps to view any situation from the side, more objectively I would say. I do read a lot of Hacker News, paper(!) books and a little bit of reddit.

untog 10y ago
Do you vote in elections and the like? If so, how do you choose a candidate/party to vote for?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- andreygrehov 10y ago
  I never voted in my life. I live in US for 4 years now, but not allowed to vote _yet_. I do not believe in the voting system. In my opinion, people's choice for one or another candidate/party is directly dependent on this candidate's marketing efforts. It doesn't make any sense, since one can be a "bad" guy by nature, but then good marketing does the trick and afterwards people vote for him/her. Some sort of a karma/rating system would probably work better, i.e. you are not allowed to run your campaign, until you collect 500 points. This approach would require candidates to merit the campaign first and require them to be "good" guys during their entire career.
  - 10y ago

Clubber 10y ago

I would recommend instead of completely ignoring the news, just stick to the 30 minute national news on CBS/ABC/NBC/NPR (maybe FOX). Everything that happens in the world in a day will fit in 30 minutes. Everything else is mostly opinion and speculation which serves the writers more than you.

tunap 10y ago
Scannng headlines in RSS feeds from a dozen or so sources gives me a glimpse of the state of world events in under 10 minutes. I rarely open TFAs unless it is a topic that is of particular interest to, or directly affects, me. Then I come to HN comments for non-clickbait sources and insights into topics I do care about.
- Clubber 10y ago
  I do that too, but I have to keep in mind that most headlines are sensational. HN comments are great.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

overcast 10y ago

I stopped being involved with social media in 2015, no news in 2017 sounds like a good next step.

sandworm101 10y ago

When the artists and revolutionaries disconnect other forces run rampant. When everything is horrible, this is when we most need the thinkers to remain focused. You dont make the world better by ignoring its problems. If politics is depressing, get involved and make it less so.

teaneedz 10y ago

Agreed. I stopped reading the general news this year too. I feel better.

insickness 10y ago

I get most of my news through social media. I find social media to be even worse than just news in terms of polluting my brain, shortening my attention span and wasting my time. I now try to stay off social media until noon every day, which was a suggestion from someone on this forum. The peace it brings to my mornings is fantastic. And once I do get on social media, I'm much less likely to binge.

libeclipse 10y ago

This seems to be concentrating on devoting your time to things (be it news, donations, events, initiatives) that make YOU feel better, rather than anything else. Weigh that against your personal beliefs and ethics before you start following what this article says.

bredren 10y ago

I also stopped watching / reading news, on or around November 16th. I thought Apple Watch had made me use my phone less, but this change has increased the amount of attention I have by a ton. My primary news outlets were G News and Twitter. I had to quit using twitter as well, which has been somewhat of a bummer as I've had tweet ideas. But I just let them pass now because it is more valuable to not have the distraction of reading others. I also have been keeping up on tech news, primarily Apple rumors and here on hacker news. Also, Reddit and various subreddits offer largely 'news free' content for when I just want to consume. If anything, these new filters have helped me see that most 'news' is really just content. And at least for now, I'm not interested in content that makes me feel bad or steals attention from my life.

emodendroket 10y ago
So you don't have time to know even the basic outlines of current affairs or politics but you do have time to obsessively follow Apple rumors? Does it not bother you to have such narrow interests?

legodt 10y ago

In the US and Europe now is a very dangerous time to give up on news. Cables news should be dropped, but I'm seeing in the comments here a few people ardently against all news. Considering that a white nationalist backed candidate is in-office with full party support starting this year, ignoring the news is a luxury only affordable to the rich white male class. Everybody else is affected.

stephenboyd 10y ago
Unless you live in a total dictatorship, it's selfish to be completely disinterested in what's going on in the world. We don't actually live in that dictatorship yet here in the US, and the actions and expressed preferences of common citizens are still influential in politics, especially if you care enough to call up your legislators and write to your newspapers. We are the cast, not the audience.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  >We don't actually live in that dictatorship yet here in the US, and the actions and expressed preferences of common citizens are still influential in politics, especially if you care enough to call up your legislators and write to your newspapers. We are the cast, not the audience. Many people participate, and push back, but we can see which way the wind is blowing. Dictatorship? Well, maybe not outright dictatorship, but certainly heavy authoritarianism along the lines of Putin and Erdogan.
eli_gottlieb 10y ago
I follow the news, but I also need to get to work on efforts to move somewhere else. My wife is completely terrified of moving far-away from family, but of course, I'm rather terrified of living under a fascist state.
- legodt 10y ago
  I don't know where you live or how hypothetically fucked you are, but it isn't too late to give a little of your time to get involved in local politics and fight back! No guilting or judgement, just trying to keep a positive mood as a lot of times these "escape plans" don't work out for various reasons

StClaire 10y ago

I spent the last year getting 95% of my news from The Economist's leaders and the world this week. Did I know about every mass shooting soon after it happened? No. But I spent a half hour a week and could speak reasonably competently about the election. More importantly: the news didn't consume me like it swallowed some of my friends

emodendroket 10y ago
Yeah, and you also got all your information about the world filtered through the Economist's extremely ideological lens.
- stevedonovan 10y ago
  Once you know their agenda, you can filter. At least they're not hysterical. Part of the problem is the very different meaning that the word 'liberal' has in the UK.
  - emodendroket 10y ago
    Filtering can't tell you what they leave out.

acchow 10y ago

From observation, it also seems that people feel great about themselves and have done their part as a citizen of humanity after reading news, "being informed" (and maybe a share on FB). I don't have data to prove it, but it seems intuitive that this results in them taking less real action?

webwanderings 10y ago
I think the opposite is true. You'd feel better if you stop watching news of far away consequences (national/world) and stop sharing what you think you want to share. You'll feel better eventually. The OP is absolutely correct on all the observations. I have been doing the same for a while: only monitor local news; don't bother sharing. And since most people on social media do not follow the same, I have stopped following social media. The difficult part initially is when you stop sharing (because you're fighting your ego) but eventually you'll see how it makes you even more productive than you are.
emodendroket 10y ago
How are you supposed to "take action" if you aren't even aware of what's happening?

imgabe 10y ago

I've taken this up as well and expanded to just watching less TV in general. I find myself always saying I don't have enough time to do all the things I want to do, yet I manage to watch an astounding amount of TV. The solution is obvious.

jaunkst 10y ago

I stopped a few years ago. If its important it will find its way to you.

paulpauper 10y ago

agree. the news is a waste of time http://greyenlightenment.com/why-the-news-is-still-mostly-pointless/ http://greyenlightenment.com/why-the-news-is-still-mostly-po... Some say the 'only constant is change'. It's actually the opposite: things seldom change, with the exception of a few blips here and there(such as 911 and the 2008 financial crisis). As further evidence of how things tend to remain constant more often than not, the post-2009 bull market and economic expansion is the longest ever despite the endless predictions of recession and crisis. Same for failed predictions of hyperinflation and dollar collapse. Web 2.0 valuations still keep rising long after pundits in 2012 said it was a bubble. There's still war and terror in the Middle East despite trillion of dollars thrown at the problem Self-improvement is more important than worrying about things outside of your control or that have little impact on your life. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are going to throw you a lifeline. That you have to do on your own, such as by investing your income in stocks or real estate and being frugal.

h1d 10y ago
> Self-improvement is more important than worrying about things outside of your control or that have little impact on your life. Can't be said better.
discombobulate 10y ago
do you have a twitter account?

afarrell 10y ago

One minor goal for me this year is to ignore most of the news and focus mainly on one specific topic that I can learn to a useful level. I think I'm going to choose the US veterans administration. Why? 1) Having moved US -> UK, I wish the US had something like the NHS. 2) I've heard multiple veterans decry the quality and responsiveness of the VA healthcare is some pretty drastic terms. 3) I know from Rep. Capuano's mailing list the GOP has been trying for years to reform Ye VA in some way. I suspect that until people stop being unhappy with the VA, that a large chunk of Americans will associate government-run healthcare with incompetence and inefficiency. This stands in stark contrast to the British perception of the NHS, so I want to know what's up.

canadian_voter 10y ago
The National Health Service? That's communism, silly. And communism is bad. More seriously, the American people just don't trust their government to be competent or efficient. Only about 20% describe government programs as "well-run."[0] Although more than 50% seem to think that it's doing an okay job on health care at the moment. It would be an incredible undertaking to establish something like the NHS in the US, and the political will just isn't there. [0] http://www.people-press.org/2015/11/23/beyond-distrust-how-americans-view-their-government/ http://www.people-press.org/2015/11/23/beyond-distrust-how-a...
- keithpeter 10y ago
  The NHS is actually organised as a large number of locally managed nodes. Doctor's practices (GPs) are self-governing to some extent, and hospitals are managed by trusts. There has been a lot of reorganisation recently (the Tories always reorganise the NHS, it is a thing they do). My knowledge of the US is limited but I imagine that a US version of the NHS would be organised by state and then by district hospitals. Plenty of moving parts at the back end but at least the patient just sees the single payer front end.
  - afarrell 10y ago
    Also there are commissioning groups? I also want to look into how the NHS works in more detail.

kayman 10y ago

It's key to differentiate between watching the news and being informed. I haven't watched the news in over a decade (except for when I'm over at someone's house being polite) and my life has been better because of it. Instead, I pay for NYTimes, Wall St Journal and read Hacker news which I find keeps me more informed than the average joe watching news stories on "what's trending on social media" type journalism.

emodendroket 10y ago

Is this a parody or something? I guess it'd explain a lot about HN if there are a lot of people on here who only read about start-ups and JavaScript frameworks and never look at other kinds of news.

ajaimk 10y ago

Mattias nails it - I've been doing this for about 3 years now and everytime I'm in public and see CNN or Fox News on TV, I cringe and reinforce my belief. On top of Hackers News, Facebook, Twitter and the Daily Show, I still tune into Bloomberg sometimes which is the closest I get to traditional News. I do have to give them props for taking a good spin on real world events (like major natural disasters) and talking about them about the impact they have on the world after they occur vs just non-stop clips of people suffering. This might seem harsh but a few people being killed by a terrorist makes no difference in the grand scheme of things - 4 days on non-stop talk about it on the News just increases paranoia and concern. Always had the idea that the 24 hour news cycle would be a lot better if they just balanced it out with puppy videos to restore our faith in humanity. Funny story - Opened the CNN app the other day to read about the Christmas incident in Germany - 17 links that basically ruin all faith in humanity - The last one (18th) was extremely clickbaity but the only one that was positive. The headline: "Bill Gates was her Secret Santa" - It's like you can't get good news without Tech being involved somehow.

davidmr 10y ago

I'm conflicted about this. On the one hand I have also decided to become as ignorant as possible about the news because (at the risk of overusing the phrase), I think we have firmly moved into a post-truth American society. If election outcomes aren't based on facts, what's the point of knowing them? On the other hand, many other people in this thread are saying that there's never been a more important time to know the news. I understand the sentiment, but I would phrase it differently: there's never been a more important time for good journalists to be doing good journalism. Except for the tricky issue of how to keep good journalists employed without people reading them, I don't feel any particular obligation to be informed. I decided to donate money to ProPublica in the hope that they'll keep the government as honest as possible without me having to deal with it.

emodendroket 10y ago
If a bunch of good journalists are cranking out great investigative reporting but nobody reads it or gives a damn then it will do nothing to "keep the government honest."
- davidmr 10y ago
  I realize this is a stupid argument, but as long as someone else is reading it, I don't feel like I have to. I'm not recommending everyone stop reading the news, just me.

z5h 10y ago

News is fine. The problem is that most news business models compete for attention via: 1. alarmist content 2. clickbait headlines 3. polarizing viewpoints There aren't as many entities who simply try to deliver balanced news and perspectives. Try reading the Economist, apnews.com, wikinews.org.

Esau 10y ago
Exactly. I realized during the run-up to the election that CNN and the other major news networks don't really report news anymore - they exploit it.

rdtsc 10y ago

I went back to watching the news, but as comedy. For a while Fox was the best for that. Really good entertainment with all the stupidity and ridiculousness so it was kind of interesting. Then during the election cycle CNN, NYT, and other major ones joined the ranks. I will always remember the "Reading these document is illegal, it is different for us, the media, so come to use for interpretation". That for me exemplified the new low the mass media has sunk to recently. It is of course useful to re-read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky and keep that in mind then news makes a lot more sense.

hkmurakami 10y ago

Imo you need to avoid social media as well, since headlines enter your mind through your timeline as well.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

jasonlotito 10y ago

This is nothing special. We all do this already. We don't watch or read news from certain sources already, and stick to other ones we come to trust, and this is all the author is doing. I honestly don't see the big deal.

anonu 10y ago

I concur with the author. I've also found that turning off any notifications on popular apps and putting them "out of reach" has also helped tremendously. I removed Instagram from my sorted folders on the front screen of my phone - and I find that I open it much less now - and its for the better. I can only deal with so many stupid memes and mindless rantings and ravings about banal and mediocre things around us. The key question to ask yourself is "Does this improve my life at all?" The answer is mostly no. Maybe one could argue there is some small "entertainment" value. In this case, I would opt for quality over quantity. For example, watching a quality movie for 2 hours rather than spending 2 hours clicking through useless articles and videos.

teddyh 10y ago

Many others have expressed similar sentiments; here’s one very good explanation: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/01/the-low-information-diet/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/01/the-low-informatio...

hacker_9 10y ago

My thoughts: UK News: Getting worse each year, though usually high quality, they go so into murder details these days it makes you sick if you aren't already desensitized. US News: these channels are all a joke, honestly Fox and CNN? I turn to these channels when I want to have a laugh. Reddit/HN: Aggregated news, actually pretty good. Though of course very western focused, Russia is the 'bad guy' etc.

KirinDave 10y ago

I really wish I could vanish back into my tradecraft. I'm am quite jealous of people who can do this. But the year I came out as non-binary is the same year my country elected a President with a VP candidate that wants to make discrimination against me not only legal but protected. E.g., under Pence's prior proposals someone could fire me because I am NB to "protect their moral conviction" and even if that firing was against corporate policy it could not be punished or easily recanted. His prior two attempts at the law also were written in a way where local and state laws could not override the federal law, which makes it even scarier. So I actually need to watch the news and remain "plugged in" because it's very much a situation for me where I am now exposed to a lot of potential damage. As such I do not feel that burying my head in the proverbial sand is a luxury I can't afford. For those who can, enjoy it.

smokeyj 10y ago
What's the point of being informed if you don't have influence? It's like watching a train wreck while you're tied to the tracks. Knowing the play by play really doesn't matter. It's so progressive to want the government involved in every facet of our lives under the guise of "effective regulation". That is, until, you disagree with the tyrant in charge. Whatever happened to life liberty and the pursuits of happiness? Seems to be pushed aside as libertarian mumbo jumbo. > His prior two attempts at the law also were written in a way where local and state laws could not override Careful now. Supporting states rights will firmly label you as a racist.
- KirinDave 10y ago
  I'm concerned about my civil rights and not your tedious verbal fencing. Every American should be concerned about the idea of making it legal for police to selectively enforce law based on "moral convictions" about marriage and lifestyle. If you're not concerned about that kind of legislation then I'm not prepared to debate you on such a fundamental tenant on a mobile keyboard. Suffice to say: I'm opposed fundamentally. As for why know about it: be real. We've got a lot more influence than you imply we do. I've got comparatively enormous financial resources to back certain people, along with the ability to finance a defensive emigration attempt.

zorked 10y ago

Being from a country that has commercial news (clickbaity, alarmist, etc.) I'm finding it ok to watch the news from European public TV. You get to know what's going on in the world but avoid most of the emotional drain.

itaysk 10y ago

I've been doing this for a few years now, and I highly recommend. I am still subscribed to various tech news feeds, but haven't watched the TV news edition, or browsed to any news website just to check the news in a very long time. I still get the important news by hearsay, Facebook, work talk, etc. I don't feel like I'm missing anything.

guelo 10y ago

One of the issues I care about is net neutrality and I'm very worried that Trump will repeal it next year. I plan on reading all related read news and to help mobilize the tech community against a repeal. There are many other similar issues that people are gearing up for a fight. Honestly, I think the people that have the luxury of ignoring all news are the privileged and selfish. We have a duty in a democracy to stay informed and join the fray. That's the price of living in a free society. If there is no grassroots involvement then the government ends up being run by the moneyed interests.

Sgt_Apone 10y ago
I've found that the solution is somewhat in middle. Burying your head in the sand and pretending everything is grand just makes you ignorant. On the other hand, consuming news everyday is a depressing affair that can warp your worldview in the opposite direction. Personally, I just consume national and international news once a week through more traditional magazines and journals. This usually means I get full reporting on events after they have unfolded and I avoid the hearsay and rumours that cable news loves. The analysis is usually top notch as well. I consume local news daily as local issues tend to affect me more directly, but I don't find it nearly as bad as the internet's daily quest to find the most gruesome national or international news story to spew everywhere. Also avoiding news subreddits and comments sections is key. I like Hacker News because the dialogue is usually pretty good and it's mostly about industry news.

bane 10y ago

I made this commitment in 2016 and don't much tune in. Important events seem to eventually percolate up into my other social discussions and places like here on HN or Facebook and I've found I've missed very few of the broad strokes -- but lots of the details. On the other hand I've also noticed that I seem to be able to approach topics more objectively and less "inflamed" with presupposed positions than before. This all has lowered my stress levels immeasurably and given me much more of a "we'll be fine" attitude about major events. The real problem is that most of the major media sources are terrible, absolute amateur hour bottom of the barrel lowest common denominator garbage. The quality of what passes for journalism these days would get a person fired from almost any other profession. When you find good journalism, it's almost like coming out a coal mine into the fresh air, but it's so hard to find it almost isn't even worth it.

maxander 10y ago

While reducing one's media consumption is a healthy goal, the author has a very odd conception of "making a meaningful difference." Does donating $50 to Red Cross not make a difference? Sure it does- that's $50 that, minus overhead or whatever, can be spent on something like medical care for those who wouldn't otherwise receive it. Its just the same as $50 to your local medical charity, in that respect; for that matter, with Red Cross, the overheads are likely lower (economy of scale and all) so it makes more of a difference. Only you don't get a thank-you card from the kid the next town over whose antibiotics you paid for; if that card is the "meaningful difference" you crave, okay, but otherwise...? Same in other respects, of course. You can make a meaningful difference to things like the Syrian conflict or what-have-you, the issue is that these issues are just so huge that a meaningful difference isn't likely going to be visible. The question is, do you want to make a difference in the world to see yourself being powerful and nice, or for an objective desire to have good effects in the world?

jstanley 10y ago
> economy of scale and all As charities get larger, they get more effective at receiving donations. There is no market pressure to make them more effective at utilising donations for their presumed purpose, only the extent to which they can leverage those donations to receive even more donations.

mikebay 10y ago

Facebook, google, twitter and Soros funded media organisations are pushing lies after lies. I have never before thinking that actually Russian news are much more accurate than "main"stream garbage news. Facebook, Google and Twitter are like Obama to world peace.. (Nobel price of peace??) Big threat to world peace. I stop watching garbage media news fev years ago. Big thanks to all "conspiracy" theorists who actually was right about many things. People, please stop believing tv or media sources without doing any your own research. Facebook, Gooogle & Twitter ? - No thanks

pryelluw 10y ago

I stopped years ago. Best decision ever. I also dont really use social media outside of work. My life is muuch much much better.

open-source-ux 10y ago

I understand the sentiment that news is often very depressing but I strongly disagree with the suggestion we should stop reading it. Don't rely on social media for your news. Pick your news sources carefully, read more than one source too. Consider listening to radio if you want to avoid emotive images or screaming headlines. But don't stop reading (or listening to) the news. The Internet makes it possible to read or listen to English language news from sources from around the world. If you are dissatisfied with news in your region or country, go and explore those other sources. And I disagree that you can't do anything about events in the news. Millions of people donate or give money to charity or fundraising campaigns as a result of events in the news. Life isn't comfortable for millions of people around the world, but why insulate yourself from what's happening around you? I can't even begin to imagine what the world would be like if we all stopped reading the news. Knowing what's happening around the world (and your own back yard) has spurred so many people to take action big and small. And even if you think "I'm never going to take action, there's nothing I can do", you can still form an opinion - that might be an important thing when it comes to election day and you have to decide who you vote for. Not being interested in the news is exactly how politicians slip legislation under the nose of the electorate. If you find reading the news depressing, read this for an inspiring story of how a Design & Technology student was spurred into action after watching a harrowing news report on Syria: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29900968 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29900968

dmfdmf 10y ago

Here is an interesting blog post by John D. Cook on how too much news creates an "Inverted Sense of Risk" http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2014/09/05/inverted-sense-of-risk/ http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2014/09/05/inverted-sense-of-r... While I highly recommend not being too connected to the concretes and noise of the day, i.e. news, I think sticking your head in the sand is not such a great idea either. Nobody planned on or set out to design and build tanks, cars, plane, guns, bombs, ciphers or databases for the Nazis but people actually did.

formula_ninguna 10y ago

News disturb you and make anxious. Besides, reading news is no use https://playforitsownsake.com/articles/why-reading-political-news-and-history-is-useless-for-predicting-events https://playforitsownsake.com/articles/why-reading-political...

tudorw 10y ago
I'm with you, it's a mantra that takes effort to maintain, I'm easily sucked into a 'serious news' narrative, then mine for background information obsessively so as to form an 'informed opinion', then what, it's formed but neutered, extending my understanding of a topic does nothing to change the situation... my existential inclinations are not well serviced by what I see as a self-indulgent and negative voyeurism, a better reaction, to double down on local, small scale, personal improvements.

mb_72 10y ago

I don't really follow the news where I live (Estonia) but I do check the news and weather for my Australian hometown daily. Why? So I can communicate with my parents about their garden and thoughts on local (to them) matters. It really helps bridge the 14,000km between us.

_Codemonkeyism 10y ago

Not watching TV since more than 5 years (also no Netflix etc.) - blocked every new source except HN at the beginning of 2016 (using leechblock in Firefox). Much happier.

dandare 10y ago

I am not sure what is the right thing to do but I feel not watching the news is not right. I too feel anxious and depressed when I follow the news and politics but I feel that I become part of the problem if I decide to live under the rock. I think the solution should be something like being able to filter the negativity and keep the zen while watching the news, not close the eyes.

Imagenuity 10y ago

I stopped watching the news in the late 90's because of the sensationalization and shallow reporting. I haven't missed it, especially now with the media bias. There are better ways of keeping up to date, especially with news feeds that you can get just the topics you want news on. But people still think I'm nuts for not watching the news.

tempodox 10y ago

s/ostridge/ostrich/ Apart from that, I can only agree. I started on the same path several years ago.

stephenboyd 10y ago

Unless you live in a total dictatorship, it's selfish to be completely disinterested in what's going on in the world, more so if you're personally unaffected by a deluge of horrors happening to others. We don't yet live in that dictatorship here in the US, and the actions and expressed preferences of common citizens are still influential in politics, especially if you care enough to call up your legislators and write to your newspapers. We are the cast, not the audience.

hnbro 10y ago

i'm inclined to think there is no such thing as a "free press". i'm also of a mind that even when one presumes such a thing exists, there's no reason to believe that this leads to "truth" or "reliability" in reporting. i hope there's a third way between corporate news and government news.

bvinc 10y ago

I've decided to stick with "slow media". I'm not going to get my news from 24/7 news channels, or reddit, or Twitter. I'm going to pick a news outlet I trust to give daily facts. I might even subscribe to a physical newspaper. I think a happy medium exists where you can stay informed, but avoid being consumed by bullshit.