Just a thought or observation, which I have not properly thought through at all... I don't use social media at all. I have dabbled in the past, but I just gave

Just a thought or observation, which I have not properly thought through at all... I don't use social media at all. I have dabbled in the past, but I just gave up relatively quickly. Do I miss out? No. There is useful stuff there, absolutely, but what I have found is that traditional media works as a sort of filter. So, I'm a F1 fan. Lots of F1 people twitter. But, anything important and useful appears in the usual traditional places. So, I have no need what so ever to follow any one on twitter. If something important comes up, it will appear on, say, the BBC's F1 sub-site. So, these days, I would suggest that twitter, facebook, etc, are like a raw feed, with traditional journalists filtering the information for me. So far, I have not ever missed out. Is that what's happening in general, or is that just me? Another thing I have discovered recently is that live news is misleading knee jerk stuff, that in the end doesn't really help most people. The latest example I can think of is the attack in London. So much info was flying about, but most of it was inaccurate and contradictory. My missus was glued to 24hr rolling news and twitter, and frankly talking nonsense, with it changing all the time. In the end, I told her to turn it all of and watch the 10 o'clock new later on, by which time a more coherent picture would have emerged. Which is pretty much what I do now. Do we really need our new instantly? Or is it better quality a few hours later? I would, of course, accept that this sort of raw live information is very useful to those involved in one way or another. But most of us aren't.