4 ms·

It's poverty porn; of course the framing is cheap. It's easy to mistake things like this as meaningful news about pollution, but it's not. "Fold up the newspa

It's poverty porn; of course the framing is cheap. It's easy to mistake things like this as meaningful news about pollution, but it's not. "Fold up the newspaper, switch off the news and unsubscribe from everything. It isnt informing you, it isnt keeeping you connected to your society, it just feels enough like is that you keep going back for a little bit more, a little bit more. And after how many decades of consuming your prefered brand content nothing has grown. Everyone trusted them and got robbed, sunk cost fallacy, move on."

alexandercrohde 7y ago
Care to elaborate? (I hope you read the article?) This to me reads like an informative and actionable piece of information that citizens should know about. Specifically: - If there is scientific evidence that living in a certain area can cause cancer, that is something you should probably know. - If there is evidence that your representatives in your state are ignoring EPA recommendations, that is something you should probably know - If you don't understand that air quality can cause cancer, that is something you should probably know
- forgottenpass 7y ago
  Certainly. I'm going to ignore this article because the details it contains are only a distraction from the shape of my perspective. Coverage about the opiate epidemic doesn't use personal stories to get the reader to take the issue seriously. They do it to trick the reader into thinking they care about the opiate epidemic for long enough to click some ads. If the death numbers didn't make someone shit their pants and get to work on fixing it, some pictures of white trash aren't going to either. A person reading the news in New York would much rather hear about the problems with a failing school district in Appalachia than their own county. It (among other things) lets them project their impression of Appalacia onto the problem, and lets them avoid thinking about the fact they're already ignoring all the issues in their own schools. Approximately nobody who will effect the local school district first hears of the problems with it in the paper. How many people who want to improve the world have actually make it their job? Or volunteer on the side? Or call local leaders every now and then? Or do as little as donate money to charities making a big impact on the world? The presence of real world issues in the news let people lie to themselves that they're doing more than consuming entertainment. The news is written with that in mind. Not consciously, no. But the system has evolved in adaptation to that constraint.

alexandercrohde 7y ago

Care to elaborate? (I hope you read the article?) This to me reads like an informative and actionable piece of information that citizens should know about. Specifically: - If there is scientific evidence that living in a certain area can cause cancer, that is something you should probably know. - If there is evidence that your representatives in your state are ignoring EPA recommendations, that is something you should probably know - If you don't understand that air quality can cause cancer, that is something you should probably know

forgottenpass 7y ago
Certainly. I'm going to ignore this article because the details it contains are only a distraction from the shape of my perspective. Coverage about the opiate epidemic doesn't use personal stories to get the reader to take the issue seriously. They do it to trick the reader into thinking they care about the opiate epidemic for long enough to click some ads. If the death numbers didn't make someone shit their pants and get to work on fixing it, some pictures of white trash aren't going to either. A person reading the news in New York would much rather hear about the problems with a failing school district in Appalachia than their own county. It (among other things) lets them project their impression of Appalacia onto the problem, and lets them avoid thinking about the fact they're already ignoring all the issues in their own schools. Approximately nobody who will effect the local school district first hears of the problems with it in the paper. How many people who want to improve the world have actually make it their job? Or volunteer on the side? Or call local leaders every now and then? Or do as little as donate money to charities making a big impact on the world? The presence of real world issues in the news let people lie to themselves that they're doing more than consuming entertainment. The news is written with that in mind. Not consciously, no. But the system has evolved in adaptation to that constraint.