3 ms·
I think there is very much a difference. 24 hour news is banal not because of its immediacy, but because, since it is always on, it needs to fill itself with l
by pretzel 14y ago
I think there is very much a difference.
24 hour news is banal not because of its immediacy, but because, since it is always on, it needs to fill itself with lower quality items. Frequent and recent updates on a current event on a ad-hoc basis is different in that it doesn't have the imperative to fill up the gaps.
Also, due to the ranking of posts, the compelling stuff rises. Compellingness, while not always correlating with quality, is at least an indicator. If quality posts rise and are then being used to then shape the discourse at an early stage, this flows through and directs the thoughts of those presenting more measured and considered pieces, thus making the whole eco-system better.
Sampling the news daily is quite enough for most people, but surely if you are wrapped up the event and need urgent news this format is a good thing. Also, if it improves the news that you then get at a daily rate, this is also good.
- zcid 14y agoI fail to see the need for up-to-date stats on who has died and where. It fills the exact same need for an dopamine rush that traditional news does. "Compellingness" is just another way of saying it satisfies the mind's desire for more little chemical hits. Anyone that has a direct need for the information (family, friends) can get it through the usual channels. For everyone else, it's just morbid fascination no matter how you attempt to justify it.