Understand that "news" is a filtered set of "information" packaged for maximum impact in minimum time. For those in the "news business" they are there to get e

Understand that "news" is a filtered set of "information" packaged for maximum impact in minimum time. For those in the "news business" they are there to get eyeballs, clicks, etc. for profit or world view support motives. Basically I am noting that all "news" is filtered, edited, and often creatively rewritten. This is to maximize the likelihood of a particular desirable audience segment to interact with it. So, yeah, I try to ignore pretty much all of it at this point. I skim some breaking news blogs/aggregators to see if anyone has started a war, or if there are disasters anywhere. But I've learned to take everything "news" I read with a kg or two of salt. Its worse in science, where creative writing distorts actual discussions. The whole "IBM quantum computer went backward in time" bit from a few days ago is a perfect example of how wrong something can go by ignoring the language given to the reporter/PR firm, and replaced with a more creative exciting (in)equivalent paragraph. This is just one of a plethora of examples, but the point is, you generally cannot rely upon information content being accurate in the vast majority of writings. I am sorry I am so cynical on this, but honestly, you'll feel much better if you stop reading the "news". Note: scare quotes "" intentional.