5 ms·

I looked into this and experimented with it a while back. My conclusion was that: a. If something is actually important to me, I will find out about it whether

I looked into this and experimented with it a while back. My conclusion was that: a. If something is actually important to me, I will find out about it whether I read the news or not. b. Keeping in mind (a), any news that I don't hear about through other channels is not urgent. c. A quick "news" piece will have almost no depth or context that could actually give the story relevance. And will very often just be outright wrong. My conclusion from these three observations was that I should read news magazines like the new yorker, forbes, etc instead of reading the nytimes. With a goal of trying to find a reasonable mix of biases so that I don't get too closed off to different points of view. If the story is actually important, yet I didn't hear about it from friends, it won't matter that they spent a month investigating it and writing it up before publishing it. And strangely, facebook becomes much more useful when thought of as a news aggregator. It will of course have a tendency to produce a bubble, but I certainly found out about Aaron Swartz on facebook far before I saw it anywhere else.

gizzlon 14y ago
How do you test a) ? How do you know what you don't know? :) It seems like you're saying that something is not important if you do not find out about it..
- vidarh 14y ago
  You test a) by following the news and making a note of what pieces are "important" and then whether or not you hear about them via other sources too.
- neltnerb 14y ago
  Certainly a risk; in my personal case I read news magazines to see what I missed with the assumption that anything important would eventually be covered there. There were a variety of things that I was glad to be hearing about, but which I don't think hearing about sooner would have made me more informed. I could be wrong, certainly I missed Paris Hilton's sex tape entirely. But more seriously, there are very specific topics which I will miss by not watching the news if I have no other source of information -- particularly political action items and dangerous weather on the horizon. But both of those topics I am certain to hear about on facebook. Might vary by friend circle though, I have friends who work at NOAA as well as obama's campaign.
- moheeb 14y ago
  What I do is not follow news of any sort. Then a few years later I realize I am still alive...must not have been important!

gizzlon 14y ago

How do you test a) ? How do you know what you don't know? :) It seems like you're saying that something is not important if you do not find out about it..

vidarh 14y ago
You test a) by following the news and making a note of what pieces are "important" and then whether or not you hear about them via other sources too.
neltnerb 14y ago
Certainly a risk; in my personal case I read news magazines to see what I missed with the assumption that anything important would eventually be covered there. There were a variety of things that I was glad to be hearing about, but which I don't think hearing about sooner would have made me more informed. I could be wrong, certainly I missed Paris Hilton's sex tape entirely. But more seriously, there are very specific topics which I will miss by not watching the news if I have no other source of information -- particularly political action items and dangerous weather on the horizon. But both of those topics I am certain to hear about on facebook. Might vary by friend circle though, I have friends who work at NOAA as well as obama's campaign.
moheeb 14y ago
What I do is not follow news of any sort. Then a few years later I realize I am still alive...must not have been important!