3 ms·

The world moves faster than experts write books. The US has an important election coming up in a few months. Regardless of which part of the political spectrum

The world moves faster than experts write books. The US has an important election coming up in a few months. Regardless of which part of the political spectrum a person is on there are issues most will care about a great deal that will be extremely impacted by the outcomes of the elections. Issues that are way too recent to get coverage in books written by experts. Like it or not, engagement with civic society requires a person to be more current on what is going on in their towns, state and country than a book publishing schedule allows. Besides, there's a lot of room in between experts' books and passively consuming whatever the top headlines are on any given day. You don't have to choose between infotainment news & a complete vacuum of knowledge about current affairs.

briHass 4y ago
Sure, but how many people are looking up congressional voting records, examining budgets, and reading thousands of pages of court decisions and the text of proposed legislation to form honest, independent opinions? It sure seems like most people use the internet and tv/cable news to reenforce their red/blue preference by watching shows or reading articles/posts that focus on how horrible blue/red is. Even for prominent sources, the depth of discussion is typically extremely shallow, appealing mostly to emotions, and highly biased towards the 'team' supported by the organization publishing it. In the voting booth, almost nobody will actually consider the candidates based on their individual merits or plans, regardless of team. The number of voters that dare to split the ticket is well below 10%, outright proving that there's little consideration of 'important issues' ; people pick a side and stick with it.
- tootie 4y ago
  That's literally what journalists do. At least good ones. The entire point of this thread seems to be that a lot of journalism is low quality and pandering to emotional responses, which is certainly true. But the solution isn't to just shut yourself off. If you read the NY Times, Washington Post, maybe long-form stuff in the The Atlantic, New Yorker, Economist and listen/read to NPR and local public media you'd be well-informed and only feel outrage if something outrageous happens.
- ineedasername 4y ago
  I never said that being a responsible member of civic society was simple or required no work. Complaining about needs needs to put effort into finding good sources of informations sounds about the same to me as if a colleague was complaining about having to read the documentation and latest release digests of software they use. That's the job.
dredmorbius 4y ago
There are over a million books written annually in the English language alone. I'll track headlines every few days. I listen to a few in-depth podcasts. An hour on a substantial topic is useful. I try to be aware of weather and local elections. That last is becoming stunningly difficult, FWIW. Otherwise, news has a useful lifetime of < 24h in most instances. Philosophy, technology, history, culture ... are far more durable. Spend your time on those instead. The tendency for public broadcasters to replace ever more long-form content and discussion with Yet Another News Show Hyping The Cycle Yet More ... is among the reasons I've curtailed even most of my public-broadcasting diet. For a time there was a weekly programme which would cover 3--4 stories in depth with background, and do so well. It had been on a bit of a fade for some years and began what I suspect is its final implosion about a year ago. That had been a useful option for me --- an hour a week, substance, most of the hype and uncertainty had already resolved. Unfortunately it seems I'm now shopping for a replacement, though I'm not entirely sure I want one.
koonsolo 4y ago
> Issues that are way too recent to get coverage in books written by experts. Can you give an example?
MarcelOlsz 4y ago
None of it matters. >The US has an important election coming up in a few months. Regardless of which part of the political spectrum a person is on there are issues most will care about a great deal that will be extremely impacted by the outcomes of the elections. It's going to happen anyways whether you watch TV or not. >You don't have to choose between infotainment news & a complete vacuum of knowledge about current affairs. Yes you do.
musicale 4y ago
> The US has an important election coming up in a few months Fortunately news media are committed to keeping the public informed up to the minute with the latest poll results so that everyone will know who seems to be winning or losing the imaginary horse race. Occasional updates will also be provided regarding a candidate's appearance, family, hobbies, pets, and any scandals or rumors thereof. Pundits will also be invited to comment on these topics, as well as who they are betting on.

briHass 4y ago

Sure, but how many people are looking up congressional voting records, examining budgets, and reading thousands of pages of court decisions and the text of proposed legislation to form honest, independent opinions? It sure seems like most people use the internet and tv/cable news to reenforce their red/blue preference by watching shows or reading articles/posts that focus on how horrible blue/red is. Even for prominent sources, the depth of discussion is typically extremely shallow, appealing mostly to emotions, and highly biased towards the 'team' supported by the organization publishing it. In the voting booth, almost nobody will actually consider the candidates based on their individual merits or plans, regardless of team. The number of voters that dare to split the ticket is well below 10%, outright proving that there's little consideration of 'important issues' ; people pick a side and stick with it.

tootie 4y ago
That's literally what journalists do. At least good ones. The entire point of this thread seems to be that a lot of journalism is low quality and pandering to emotional responses, which is certainly true. But the solution isn't to just shut yourself off. If you read the NY Times, Washington Post, maybe long-form stuff in the The Atlantic, New Yorker, Economist and listen/read to NPR and local public media you'd be well-informed and only feel outrage if something outrageous happens.
ineedasername 4y ago
I never said that being a responsible member of civic society was simple or required no work. Complaining about needs needs to put effort into finding good sources of informations sounds about the same to me as if a colleague was complaining about having to read the documentation and latest release digests of software they use. That's the job.

dredmorbius 4y ago

There are over a million books written annually in the English language alone. I'll track headlines every few days. I listen to a few in-depth podcasts. An hour on a substantial topic is useful. I try to be aware of weather and local elections. That last is becoming stunningly difficult, FWIW. Otherwise, news has a useful lifetime of < 24h in most instances. Philosophy, technology, history, culture ... are far more durable. Spend your time on those instead. The tendency for public broadcasters to replace ever more long-form content and discussion with Yet Another News Show Hyping The Cycle Yet More ... is among the reasons I've curtailed even most of my public-broadcasting diet. For a time there was a weekly programme which would cover 3--4 stories in depth with background, and do so well. It had been on a bit of a fade for some years and began what I suspect is its final implosion about a year ago. That had been a useful option for me --- an hour a week, substance, most of the hype and uncertainty had already resolved. Unfortunately it seems I'm now shopping for a replacement, though I'm not entirely sure I want one.

koonsolo 4y ago

> Issues that are way too recent to get coverage in books written by experts. Can you give an example?

MarcelOlsz 4y ago

None of it matters. >The US has an important election coming up in a few months. Regardless of which part of the political spectrum a person is on there are issues most will care about a great deal that will be extremely impacted by the outcomes of the elections. It's going to happen anyways whether you watch TV or not. >You don't have to choose between infotainment news & a complete vacuum of knowledge about current affairs. Yes you do.

musicale 4y ago

> The US has an important election coming up in a few months Fortunately news media are committed to keeping the public informed up to the minute with the latest poll results so that everyone will know who seems to be winning or losing the imaginary horse race. Occasional updates will also be provided regarding a candidate's appearance, family, hobbies, pets, and any scandals or rumors thereof. Pundits will also be invited to comment on these topics, as well as who they are betting on.