7 ms·

It's poor deal, it's not worth. Just because I may learn some small things that probably does not affect me directly and additionally receive some news that ma

It's poor deal, it's not worth. Just because I may learn some small things that probably does not affect me directly and additionally receive some news that make my mood worse due to hearing some yet another negative news about bad stuff / politics / yada yada, what's the point? 80% of the news I read is HN and some programming related websites and whenever I jump into "mainstream" media, then I feel like I'm reading some shit - click baits, tragedies, controversial stuff, drama seeking, celebrities it's irrelevant for me

throw737858 5y ago
Most Americans do not realise how deep in their information rabbit hole they are. Denial is not solution. Outside perspective (indian news) improves your mental health and resistance. It is mainstream, but based perspective.
- tester34 5y ago
  I'm not American, I think the only "purely American" news that I see is probably something about $BIG politics like election outcome, war, blabla.
fumblebee 5y ago
Not all news is made equal, though maybe you implied this by using the term mainstream. There's a profound difference in what you get out of a curated editorial in the Economist and the talking heads on Fox News. I'd argue the former has tremendous value and isn't presented in a way that pokes at our anxieties.
bnralt 5y ago
Indeed. The other problem is that the news is often filled with misleading narratives that lead people to be less informed than before, and that it creates a huge opportunity cost in terms of attention. When you cut out the news you start to notice a lot of things around you that you were glossing over before.
- jiofih 5y ago
  How do you get informed on things happening on the other side of the world? (please don’t say Twitter!)
  - tester34 5y ago
    Generally: a) Through friends b) It's so big that's almost everywhere and you cannot escape it c) I don't get informed (but may later in time) Of course it's not perfect approach
    - jiofih 5y ago
      a) and b) just mean you’re relying on someone else who watches the news, so the same drawbacks apply…
      - tester34 5y ago
        but all the bad stuff is "outsourced" :)
  - bnralt 5y ago
    I think people should spend a lot more time considering what they're trying to get informed about and for what purpose. Reading books (particularly older books), talking to a wide variety of people, looking at primary sources, paying attention to what's around you in your environment - all of those is going to put you in a much better position than being a media junkie. For instance, if you want to be an informed voter, then spending a few minutes flipping through the Vote411 pamphlet put out by The League of Women Voters is going to put you ahead of the vast majority of people who absorb political news 24/7. It's also often the only information you'll find on many local races. Often people will tell you that they're watching the news to be an informed voter, except they're mostly watching things that align with the decisions they've already made. I know many people who decided years ago how they feel about a national candidate, spend hours every week for years watching news that just reinforces that, and then zero knowledge about any of the candidates in local races where there vote actually has a much greater impact. That's not being an informed voter, that's feeding a bad habit. Likewise with international news - what are people actually trying to accomplish? Most of the time it's not being informed, it's following a media narrative and ignoring things as soon as the narrative changes. Do you remember when Darfur was a big topic in the early 2000's? Mali about 9 years ago? Those conflicts are still ongoing, but seem to have been forgotten. How about "Bring Back Our Girls"? Likewise Libya, Syria, and a host of other conflicts that suddenly shift from "very important and everyone needs to be informed about it" to a distant memory. Again, the way these things are treated isn't about keeping people informed, but feeding media junkie habits. And the nature of this kind of poor reporting has very real consequences - just look at the Iraq War. Ignorance is preferable to disinformation.

throw737858 5y ago

Most Americans do not realise how deep in their information rabbit hole they are. Denial is not solution. Outside perspective (indian news) improves your mental health and resistance. It is mainstream, but based perspective.

tester34 5y ago
I'm not American, I think the only "purely American" news that I see is probably something about $BIG politics like election outcome, war, blabla.

fumblebee 5y ago

Not all news is made equal, though maybe you implied this by using the term mainstream. There's a profound difference in what you get out of a curated editorial in the Economist and the talking heads on Fox News. I'd argue the former has tremendous value and isn't presented in a way that pokes at our anxieties.

bnralt 5y ago

Indeed. The other problem is that the news is often filled with misleading narratives that lead people to be less informed than before, and that it creates a huge opportunity cost in terms of attention. When you cut out the news you start to notice a lot of things around you that you were glossing over before.

jiofih 5y ago
How do you get informed on things happening on the other side of the world? (please don’t say Twitter!)
- tester34 5y ago
  Generally: a) Through friends b) It's so big that's almost everywhere and you cannot escape it c) I don't get informed (but may later in time) Of course it's not perfect approach
  - jiofih 5y ago
    a) and b) just mean you’re relying on someone else who watches the news, so the same drawbacks apply…
    - tester34 5y ago
      but all the bad stuff is "outsourced" :)
- bnralt 5y ago
  I think people should spend a lot more time considering what they're trying to get informed about and for what purpose. Reading books (particularly older books), talking to a wide variety of people, looking at primary sources, paying attention to what's around you in your environment - all of those is going to put you in a much better position than being a media junkie. For instance, if you want to be an informed voter, then spending a few minutes flipping through the Vote411 pamphlet put out by The League of Women Voters is going to put you ahead of the vast majority of people who absorb political news 24/7. It's also often the only information you'll find on many local races. Often people will tell you that they're watching the news to be an informed voter, except they're mostly watching things that align with the decisions they've already made. I know many people who decided years ago how they feel about a national candidate, spend hours every week for years watching news that just reinforces that, and then zero knowledge about any of the candidates in local races where there vote actually has a much greater impact. That's not being an informed voter, that's feeding a bad habit. Likewise with international news - what are people actually trying to accomplish? Most of the time it's not being informed, it's following a media narrative and ignoring things as soon as the narrative changes. Do you remember when Darfur was a big topic in the early 2000's? Mali about 9 years ago? Those conflicts are still ongoing, but seem to have been forgotten. How about "Bring Back Our Girls"? Likewise Libya, Syria, and a host of other conflicts that suddenly shift from "very important and everyone needs to be informed about it" to a distant memory. Again, the way these things are treated isn't about keeping people informed, but feeding media junkie habits. And the nature of this kind of poor reporting has very real consequences - just look at the Iraq War. Ignorance is preferable to disinformation.