3 ms·

The reverse of this is of course baby boomer generations who hate what the news has become (TV and Newspaper) yet slavishly consume it anyway, because of a life

by brc 12y ago

The reverse of this is of course baby boomer generations who hate what the news has become (TV and Newspaper) yet slavishly consume it anyway, because of a lifetime habit. Whenever I see an older relative frothing about some stupid article in the newspaper, or some pointless piece on TV - I just say 'why not switch it off? Why buy the paper anyway?' I don't watch the news or read newspapers anymore, unless I happen to be in the vicinity of either by accident. If something important happens, I find out. Everyone does. Neighbours, people you work with - they're always delighted to share news you didn't hear about, and they don't drop in ads. In the case of TV news and newspapers - lets say 6 hours a week glued to the talking heads and 4 hours a week in the paper = 500 hours a year - 12 24hr days in total, or 24 12hr days. All so they can sell your eyeballs to the highest bidder. Who wouldn't like 24 extra days time to do as they please with? Stop paying attention to the media. You end up selling your time for pennies worth of benefit.

ternaryoperator 12y ago
>In the case of TV news and newspapers - lets say 6 hours a week glued to the talking heads and 4 hours a week in the paper = 500 hours a year - 12 24hr days in total, or 24 12hr days. All so they can sell your eyeballs to the highest bidder. Who wouldn't like 24 extra days time to do as they please with? So, exactly like Twitter and FB.
Sven7 12y ago
It's not that simple. Capturing people's attention is now a well studied science. The addiction is engineered. The people who are addicted(or "engaged") to their media streams whether social or main stream need the same sort of help any addict needs to kick the habit. Since the addiction thus far hasn't caused lung cancer, driving accidents, violent behavior etc we can all continue to 1. make money of it and 2. tell the addicts to figure it out for themselves
- cweiss 12y ago
  Not to mention that the same people who would be relied on to spread any information about the harm of consuming said media is... said media.
puranjay 12y ago
News has been able to sell itself with the dictum that you "have to know what's happening!" In reality, you really don't need to know what's happening around the world. Seriously. 95% of the news you read does not impact you in any meaningful way. Most of it is negative (which is the very nature of news) and too little of it concerns you in your immediate surroundings. So yeah. You don't need to news. At least not 90% of what passes for news these days.
- frostmatthew 12y ago
  > 95% of the news you read does not impact you in any meaningful way Maybe the world is better when people care about what impacts other people, not just themselves.
  - mycroft-holmes 12y ago
    I don't think selfishness is what the parent commenter is referring to. A great example of "news" not impacting me in any meaningful way was a week or two ago when there was breaking news about two alpacas on the loose. Meanwhile, net neutrality passed with a 300+ page document the public wasn't allowed to see at the time.
    - puranjay 12y ago
      Right. The news that actually has an impact on the world is limited and usually accessible through non-news mediums (this site, Reddit, etc.). In fact, mainstream media often doesn't cover the news that really impacts you (the net-neutrality debate had pitiful coverage). On the other hand, Obama not saluting some marines or Michel Bachmann saying some dumb thing has no real impact on the world, mine or others.
- coldpie 12y ago
  > News has been able to sell itself with the dictum that you "have to know what's happening!" Yeah. A couple years ago when I was about 24, I decided I "should be more informed" because that's what adults do, so I bought a year subscription to Minneapolis's major newspaper with the goal of reading it mostly every day. I did for a while, but quickly realised that I didn't give a shit about almost anything in the paper. And worse, the things I read made me actively depressed. You know what? I don't care about how the war in Iraq is going. I don't care what some dumb conservative politician had to say about my friends and family. I don't care what crazy shit Russia or North Korea are getting up to. I don't care how many people are dying in a genocide on the other side of the world. I guess maybe that makes me a bad person or something, but boy am I happier and more productive not knowing it. I canceled that subscription and I'm never looking back. "Keeping up with the news" was one of the worst things I ever did.

by brc 12y ago

ternaryoperator 12y ago

>In the case of TV news and newspapers - lets say 6 hours a week glued to the talking heads and 4 hours a week in the paper = 500 hours a year - 12 24hr days in total, or 24 12hr days. All so they can sell your eyeballs to the highest bidder. Who wouldn't like 24 extra days time to do as they please with? So, exactly like Twitter and FB.

Sven7 12y ago

It's not that simple. Capturing people's attention is now a well studied science. The addiction is engineered. The people who are addicted(or "engaged") to their media streams whether social or main stream need the same sort of help any addict needs to kick the habit. Since the addiction thus far hasn't caused lung cancer, driving accidents, violent behavior etc we can all continue to 1. make money of it and 2. tell the addicts to figure it out for themselves

cweiss 12y ago
Not to mention that the same people who would be relied on to spread any information about the harm of consuming said media is... said media.

puranjay 12y ago

News has been able to sell itself with the dictum that you "have to know what's happening!" In reality, you really don't need to know what's happening around the world. Seriously. 95% of the news you read does not impact you in any meaningful way. Most of it is negative (which is the very nature of news) and too little of it concerns you in your immediate surroundings. So yeah. You don't need to news. At least not 90% of what passes for news these days.

frostmatthew 12y ago
> 95% of the news you read does not impact you in any meaningful way Maybe the world is better when people care about what impacts other people, not just themselves.
- mycroft-holmes 12y ago
  I don't think selfishness is what the parent commenter is referring to. A great example of "news" not impacting me in any meaningful way was a week or two ago when there was breaking news about two alpacas on the loose. Meanwhile, net neutrality passed with a 300+ page document the public wasn't allowed to see at the time.
  - puranjay 12y ago
    Right. The news that actually has an impact on the world is limited and usually accessible through non-news mediums (this site, Reddit, etc.). In fact, mainstream media often doesn't cover the news that really impacts you (the net-neutrality debate had pitiful coverage). On the other hand, Obama not saluting some marines or Michel Bachmann saying some dumb thing has no real impact on the world, mine or others.
coldpie 12y ago
> News has been able to sell itself with the dictum that you "have to know what's happening!" Yeah. A couple years ago when I was about 24, I decided I "should be more informed" because that's what adults do, so I bought a year subscription to Minneapolis's major newspaper with the goal of reading it mostly every day. I did for a while, but quickly realised that I didn't give a shit about almost anything in the paper. And worse, the things I read made me actively depressed. You know what? I don't care about how the war in Iraq is going. I don't care what some dumb conservative politician had to say about my friends and family. I don't care what crazy shit Russia or North Korea are getting up to. I don't care how many people are dying in a genocide on the other side of the world. I guess maybe that makes me a bad person or something, but boy am I happier and more productive not knowing it. I canceled that subscription and I'm never looking back. "Keeping up with the news" was one of the worst things I ever did.