3 ms·

> Media Consumption Strike ... > No TV/Netflix/Youtube > No radio > No podcasts > No social media, delete your Facebook account > No messaging/chat > No

> Media Consumption Strike ... > No TV/Netflix/Youtube > No radio > No podcasts > No social media, delete your Facebook account > No messaging/chat > No idle web browsing > No news aggregation sites > No gaming > No using a computer if it is not directly related to creating or resisting (not consuming) Seems kind of extreme to me. Article mentions that our "attention has been colonized". Maybe focus a little more on how your attention is being sold instead of targeted. Understanding the way FB values users ($100/year if you're in the US) and sells their attention to marketers would instruct better ways to deal with attention colonization IMHO.

Lionsion 9y ago
>> Media Consumption Strike [list from OP] > Seems kind of extreme to me. Not really. Literally the next paragraph after that list is this: > Don’t be a fundamentalist about the rules. Rules are meant to be broken. If it’s art, the rules are more loose; if its corporate media, more strict. Cinema, literature, sci-fi, comic books, indy games: as long as these types of works are not connected with our professional, interpersonal, or political responsibilities, use them in moderation. In general, make sure media consumption is done with more moderation than usual. The goal is to break your habits.
eecsninja 9y ago
Agreed that this extreme. It doesn't cut to the heart of the issue, which is that these services are being funded somehow. Mostly by ads, I'm guessing. Somewhere out there are people who are not only unable to resist giving their attention to social media, but also unable to resist giving money in the form of clicks. I've never clicked on these ads. If I want to buy products, I go to amazon.com. I book my flights and hotels through travel websites. I imagine many people on HN would say the same. But then again, we are not representative of the population at large.
chrischen 9y ago
If Facebook values a US user at $100/year, then many people would likely not be willing to pay that cost, and Facebook should pay those users a larger share of that revenue to bribe them.
bowlich 9y ago
Any one of those items could be problematic depending on the individual. I see it (particularly in light of the following paragraph) as a call to me mindful and intentional about your media consumption. Me and my spouse watch a movie together every Friday night. It becomes a conversation piece as we go through the rest of the weekend. It is one thing among many things we might do together or with friends through the weekend. Some couples that I know will binge watch an entire television series through the weekend. It becomes the only thing that they do -- it carries them from the end of the work day on Friday to work on Monday in an unreflective daze. I can understand the need to unwind, but at some juncture you've gone from unwinding to simply filling time, hardly eudaimonia. For myself, the problems has been news aggregation (I read too much, reflect on what I read too little) and social media (makes me lonely, when I could better be using the time to talk with and make friends). If you are just there to fill the void, then maybe it would be better to work at becoming comfortable with the void.

Lionsion 9y ago

>> Media Consumption Strike [list from OP] > Seems kind of extreme to me. Not really. Literally the next paragraph after that list is this: > Don’t be a fundamentalist about the rules. Rules are meant to be broken. If it’s art, the rules are more loose; if its corporate media, more strict. Cinema, literature, sci-fi, comic books, indy games: as long as these types of works are not connected with our professional, interpersonal, or political responsibilities, use them in moderation. In general, make sure media consumption is done with more moderation than usual. The goal is to break your habits.

eecsninja 9y ago

Agreed that this extreme. It doesn't cut to the heart of the issue, which is that these services are being funded somehow. Mostly by ads, I'm guessing. Somewhere out there are people who are not only unable to resist giving their attention to social media, but also unable to resist giving money in the form of clicks. I've never clicked on these ads. If I want to buy products, I go to amazon.com. I book my flights and hotels through travel websites. I imagine many people on HN would say the same. But then again, we are not representative of the population at large.

chrischen 9y ago

If Facebook values a US user at $100/year, then many people would likely not be willing to pay that cost, and Facebook should pay those users a larger share of that revenue to bribe them.

bowlich 9y ago

Any one of those items could be problematic depending on the individual. I see it (particularly in light of the following paragraph) as a call to me mindful and intentional about your media consumption. Me and my spouse watch a movie together every Friday night. It becomes a conversation piece as we go through the rest of the weekend. It is one thing among many things we might do together or with friends through the weekend. Some couples that I know will binge watch an entire television series through the weekend. It becomes the only thing that they do -- it carries them from the end of the work day on Friday to work on Monday in an unreflective daze. I can understand the need to unwind, but at some juncture you've gone from unwinding to simply filling time, hardly eudaimonia. For myself, the problems has been news aggregation (I read too much, reflect on what I read too little) and social media (makes me lonely, when I could better be using the time to talk with and make friends). If you are just there to fill the void, then maybe it would be better to work at becoming comfortable with the void.