Since the article explains how they "process" the news, i'll anecdote for a moment. Prior to 2001, i watched maybe 15 minutes of news a day, like while making

Since the article explains how they "process" the news, i'll anecdote for a moment. Prior to 2001, i watched maybe 15 minutes of news a day, like while making lunch, or just KNX 1070 in the car. September 11th, i began watching 2+ screens of news, recording it, analyzing it. This went on until at least 2002. Something "snapped" and i got rid of my TV. a few years later, i still had no TV, no cable, etc. I just didn't "watch" news. Professor Naji Dahi said i was the first person in his class to ever answer "0 TVs" when he polled the class about how many screens were in their house, around 2004-2005. I still don't have a "TV". And 50% of my news is "social media", and the other 50% of "real news" comes from a news analysis podcast that i won't evangelize. I've linked to archival news clips hosted by the showrunners, here, though. THe podcast is ~5 hours a week, and i spend about 5 hours actually researching and analyzing news i see on social media, usually so i have an understanding if someone mentions the news story later in the week (or whatever). The news stresses me out. It makes me angry - but approaching it from an analysis standpoint makes it less so. It makes it funny in a "tragedy" sort of way. Just as an example, i look outside every day and it's the exact same. regardless of what the news says is going on. This might not hold true for everyone. I don't have some deep philosophical wisdom to share, here. No matter what you ingest and process, if you talk about it in public, someone will disagree with you.