3 ms·

I do not mean to disagree with the OP, but here's a thought: What would happen if we required someone like Warren Buffet to ignore the news? What if he was pr

by howcan 14y ago

I do not mean to disagree with the OP, but here's a thought: What would happen if we required someone like Warren Buffet to ignore the news? What if he was prohibited from reading a single newspaper? What would happen? I know many people who read multiple newspapers every day, without fail. If they were not allowed access to the news, I think their ability to function in their chosen profession would be severely impacted.

splat 14y ago
> What would happen if we required someone like Warren Buffet to ignore the news? I think that's missing the point a bit. The OP was pointing out that there is an opportunity cost of consuming the news. For the OP, the return on his time investment was not worth it. But for someone like Warren Buffet, it obviously would be.
- howcan 14y ago
  No, I think I understand the OP. That's why I said "I do not mean to disagree..." Did you catch that part? I'm simply pointing out that for some people the news is very valuable to what they do. As you say, for the OP it might not have as much value. It depends on what you're trying to do. I think a more interesting title would be: "The power of being able to think for yourself". For example, it's possible to be able to read the news, when it is overwhelmingly negative or even low quality news (e.g. it doesn't tell you anything you don't already know), and still derive something positive from it. And there are many examples that prove this: businesspeople who read heaps of news and still manage to accomplish quite a lot, at least in the opinion of their peers. You may stop reading the news. But most everyone else is still reading it. And to the extent your business is concerned with some segment of that group I refer to as "everyone else", the news is a factor to consider. Hope that's a little more clear. pg's essay on PR as it relates to startups is a decent intro into how the news can be important for hackers.
k_kelly 14y ago
There are by and large two types of stories in newspapers. Stories that appeal to emotion and stories that relate to data. From my experience in newsrooms, stories that are primarily emotional are dealt with by Journalists nearly exclusively, they require strong story telling and usually invasive interviewing and exposure. Stories from data tend to be collected by outside interests and presented to newspapers. Journalists can then spin stories from the data, or if they are writing for a financial publication typically highlight the most salient points for consumption. Occasionally, and far more infrequently than in the past, the media institution will collect a survey themselves or crunch the numbers, and this is almost always pseudo-scientific. Ultimately journalists rarely improve this data other than to make it more gossip worthy. There is a huge amount of data presented every day, from pr firms, from foundations and from public bodies, and all of it wants to be read. Warren Buffet might prefer to read it in the New York Times, but with a strong and deep twitter feed almost anyone can now be as informed as the average news room (there are exceptions to this, on the other hand, reading those same newspapers cover to cover is also a good way to fill your head with soporific twaddle) While I don't agree with the original article, as I think many publications offer some well reasoned analysis and challenging opinions, social media is more than enough to stay as well informed as anyone, though it remains more difficult to navigate. On the other hand, imagine if Warren Buffet were only allowed to get his information from cable news. That would be frightening.
- howcan 14y ago
  Interesting comment. PR may see social media as a threat, for exactly the reason you've mentioned. "Well-informed" is relative I think to what you're doing. For example, someone doing hard science research in a lab may only need access to scientific journals. She needs to keep pace with what is published in her area of research only; she could be oblivious to what's happening in the world and still be effective in her job. But from what I know of Buffet, I think he needs access to what journalists are saying. Again, it matter what you're trying to do.

by howcan 14y ago

splat 14y ago

> What would happen if we required someone like Warren Buffet to ignore the news? I think that's missing the point a bit. The OP was pointing out that there is an opportunity cost of consuming the news. For the OP, the return on his time investment was not worth it. But for someone like Warren Buffet, it obviously would be.

howcan 14y ago
No, I think I understand the OP. That's why I said "I do not mean to disagree..." Did you catch that part? I'm simply pointing out that for some people the news is very valuable to what they do. As you say, for the OP it might not have as much value. It depends on what you're trying to do. I think a more interesting title would be: "The power of being able to think for yourself". For example, it's possible to be able to read the news, when it is overwhelmingly negative or even low quality news (e.g. it doesn't tell you anything you don't already know), and still derive something positive from it. And there are many examples that prove this: businesspeople who read heaps of news and still manage to accomplish quite a lot, at least in the opinion of their peers. You may stop reading the news. But most everyone else is still reading it. And to the extent your business is concerned with some segment of that group I refer to as "everyone else", the news is a factor to consider. Hope that's a little more clear. pg's essay on PR as it relates to startups is a decent intro into how the news can be important for hackers.

k_kelly 14y ago

There are by and large two types of stories in newspapers. Stories that appeal to emotion and stories that relate to data. From my experience in newsrooms, stories that are primarily emotional are dealt with by Journalists nearly exclusively, they require strong story telling and usually invasive interviewing and exposure. Stories from data tend to be collected by outside interests and presented to newspapers. Journalists can then spin stories from the data, or if they are writing for a financial publication typically highlight the most salient points for consumption. Occasionally, and far more infrequently than in the past, the media institution will collect a survey themselves or crunch the numbers, and this is almost always pseudo-scientific. Ultimately journalists rarely improve this data other than to make it more gossip worthy. There is a huge amount of data presented every day, from pr firms, from foundations and from public bodies, and all of it wants to be read. Warren Buffet might prefer to read it in the New York Times, but with a strong and deep twitter feed almost anyone can now be as informed as the average news room (there are exceptions to this, on the other hand, reading those same newspapers cover to cover is also a good way to fill your head with soporific twaddle) While I don't agree with the original article, as I think many publications offer some well reasoned analysis and challenging opinions, social media is more than enough to stay as well informed as anyone, though it remains more difficult to navigate. On the other hand, imagine if Warren Buffet were only allowed to get his information from cable news. That would be frightening.

howcan 14y ago
Interesting comment. PR may see social media as a threat, for exactly the reason you've mentioned. "Well-informed" is relative I think to what you're doing. For example, someone doing hard science research in a lab may only need access to scientific journals. She needs to keep pace with what is published in her area of research only; she could be oblivious to what's happening in the world and still be effective in her job. But from what I know of Buffet, I think he needs access to what journalists are saying. Again, it matter what you're trying to do.