4 ms·

But how will you decide which is worth knowing if you never look? I get why you may want to take it in at a slower pace than a social media feed, but it seems

But how will you decide which is worth knowing if you never look? I get why you may want to take it in at a slower pace than a social media feed, but it seems like there's no way to tell what's worth knowing if you "stop consuming news".

thoughtstheseus 7y ago
If it matters to my work I’ll find out about it through industry channels or coworkers. If it matters to my family/community/area I’ll hear about it from local interactions.
- dominotw 7y ago
  > I’ll hear about it from local interactions Why is the medium of acquisition of news important here, seems like an irrelevant distinction. How can one be 'Ignorant of current events' if he is acquiring said current events through coworkers/locals. This is precisely what I was referring to in my original comment. Not everyone has the privilege to leave safety of their family to random happenstance local interactions. eg: My wife's grand parents are on greencard and unenrolled themselves from one govt service based on recent news about being a public charge. Some ppl are constantly on the edge to leave it to 'local interactions' > if it matters to my family/community/area I’ll hear about it from local interactions. Reading only relevant news is still reading news.
  - thoughtstheseus 7y ago
    I’m talking about reading and consuming news as Dobelli is describing it, not avoiding new info at all costs.
- treebornfrog 7y ago
  Spot on. Anything that will impact your life will be filtered through.
  - dominotw 7y ago
    > will be filtered through. How are you so sure it will ? It might not. correct?
    - GarrisonPrime 7y ago
      If it affects your life, you’ll become aware of it eventually. By definition. It’s surely possible that something could occur that has repercussions for your life, to where you would have preferred to be aware of it ahead of time. But I can only think of 1 time in my 40 years when that’s happened with any significance. Hardly worth making myself an anxious wreck trying to constantly “be informed”. No matter how diligent one tried to keep pace, you’d never be certain of catching everything anyway.
treebornfrog 7y ago
The idea here isn't if one should consume mainstream news and make decisions on what is relevant. 99% is irrelevant Decision fatigue Generally crap stuff Unhealthy Chips away on your perspective Better to vet individual publications and consume at really moderate rates, for example, the economist, pointed out in the paper.

thoughtstheseus 7y ago

If it matters to my work I’ll find out about it through industry channels or coworkers. If it matters to my family/community/area I’ll hear about it from local interactions.

dominotw 7y ago
> I’ll hear about it from local interactions Why is the medium of acquisition of news important here, seems like an irrelevant distinction. How can one be 'Ignorant of current events' if he is acquiring said current events through coworkers/locals. This is precisely what I was referring to in my original comment. Not everyone has the privilege to leave safety of their family to random happenstance local interactions. eg: My wife's grand parents are on greencard and unenrolled themselves from one govt service based on recent news about being a public charge. Some ppl are constantly on the edge to leave it to 'local interactions' > if it matters to my family/community/area I’ll hear about it from local interactions. Reading only relevant news is still reading news.
- thoughtstheseus 7y ago
  I’m talking about reading and consuming news as Dobelli is describing it, not avoiding new info at all costs.
treebornfrog 7y ago
Spot on. Anything that will impact your life will be filtered through.
- dominotw 7y ago
  > will be filtered through. How are you so sure it will ? It might not. correct?
  - GarrisonPrime 7y ago
    If it affects your life, you’ll become aware of it eventually. By definition. It’s surely possible that something could occur that has repercussions for your life, to where you would have preferred to be aware of it ahead of time. But I can only think of 1 time in my 40 years when that’s happened with any significance. Hardly worth making myself an anxious wreck trying to constantly “be informed”. No matter how diligent one tried to keep pace, you’d never be certain of catching everything anyway.

treebornfrog 7y ago

The idea here isn't if one should consume mainstream news and make decisions on what is relevant. 99% is irrelevant Decision fatigue Generally crap stuff Unhealthy Chips away on your perspective Better to vet individual publications and consume at really moderate rates, for example, the economist, pointed out in the paper.