3 ms·

That statement doesn't preclude some political activity if you consider it to be something that you can actually "impact and improve", in the author's words. Of

That statement doesn't preclude some political activity if you consider it to be something that you can actually "impact and improve", in the author's words. Of course I can only speculate about the author's original intent, but I think I agree insofar that most daily news out there is irrelevant for most individuals. Even if you have a political cause you are interested in, you have limited time and energy, so it might be better to just stay informed in those areas that concern you and ignore the rest of the daily news. You can't fix the world as an individual, so it's pointless to concern yourself with things you can't impact. Of course that still means that everyone should probably find a little thing where they can try to make a change.

ivm 9y ago
Yes, I still read the local news once a week and the biggest events pass my filters anyway. Intentionally following the popular news also steals your attention from the small tragedies that are never picked up by the big media.
freshhawk 9y ago
Perfectly reasonable stance to take. Of course that assumes you do not ever vote, because you are not an informed citizen and voting would be both ethically and morally wrong.
- ashark 9y ago
  It's easy enough in our lesser-of-two-evils system in the US to spend an hour (or less) before an election and nail down pretty well which is the lesser for each race on the ballot. Day-to-day following the news 100% not required unless you just like doing that, or have the means and/or will to contribute substantially outside of voting. This assumes a general awareness and understanding of political, economic, and social topics that one might not have without having spent at least a few years "plugged in", though, so maybe only viable for oldsters.
  - freshhawk 9y ago
    Sure, american federal elections are simple enough for this to not apply in that case.

ivm 9y ago

Yes, I still read the local news once a week and the biggest events pass my filters anyway. Intentionally following the popular news also steals your attention from the small tragedies that are never picked up by the big media.

freshhawk 9y ago

Perfectly reasonable stance to take. Of course that assumes you do not ever vote, because you are not an informed citizen and voting would be both ethically and morally wrong.

ashark 9y ago
It's easy enough in our lesser-of-two-evils system in the US to spend an hour (or less) before an election and nail down pretty well which is the lesser for each race on the ballot. Day-to-day following the news 100% not required unless you just like doing that, or have the means and/or will to contribute substantially outside of voting. This assumes a general awareness and understanding of political, economic, and social topics that one might not have without having spent at least a few years "plugged in", though, so maybe only viable for oldsters.
- freshhawk 9y ago
  Sure, american federal elections are simple enough for this to not apply in that case.