3 ms·

I couldn't agree more with Aaron on that. A lot of people have started turning a blind eye to the TV, but very often they replace it with constant news coverag

I couldn't agree more with Aaron on that. A lot of people have started turning a blind eye to the TV, but very often they replace it with constant news coverage online. So they really have made no significant change in their lives. They're still spoonfed with something that has never had any impact on them, and most likely never will. Anything with a significant impact, and unfortunately many things without it, are relayed through friends, family and co-workers. If the bomb drops or christ returns then we have a warning system setup all over Sweden that wakes anyone up. I can only imagine bad things from watching the news. I can't prove anything but it can't be good to constantly be told about negative things happening halfway across the world.

parennoob 12y ago
> If the bomb drops or christ returns then we have a warning system setup all over Sweden that wakes anyone up. How does the warning system work for the return of christ? Church bells?
TeMPOraL 12y ago
That's why I limited my news to Hacker News. Whenever there is an event that actually matters - like a war or a cataclysm - it will be here, upvoted and with comments made by people who know what they're talking about. I don't mind missing the 99% of the typical news sites content.
- lordbusiness 12y ago
  I've been running an experiment for the past several months to outsource relevant news curation. It's super simple and super passive. Basically I only read news brought to my attention organically; social media, word on the street which I later look up, etc. Thus far I haven't missed anything of genuine humanity-shaking importance, my emotional state has improved, and I have much more time for reading, hacking, and all other aspects of my life. It resonates with the "millennials consume news differently" piece submitted elsewhere on HN actually.
  - Goronmon 12y ago
    Doesn't this experiment rely on a certain critical mass of people consuming information in a non-organic fashion?
    - lordbusiness 12y ago
      Not really, though I don't claim this has been a truly scientific study. :-) Generally, the principle relies on "if it's not important [1], people don't talk about it". In other words, anything someone directly or indirectly mentions to me may be of value, everything else is just soundtrack. [2] Further, I often find that news that does matter comes to me from the likes of a more considered periodical; I learnt a lot of fact-based detail regarding the Alberta oil sands from National Geographic, and I learn about peace process break downs from twitter users I follow far quicker and with less bias than from mainstream media outlets. Local news tends to be handled by random people I meet on the street. It's effective so far! [1] This is an overly burdened word in this context. Darfur is very important, but we rarely hear about it, for example. What I mean in this context is "relevant enough to daily life to stop me in my tracks and get my attention". It's worth highlighting here that a lot of very important news doesn't make it to us via mainstream media because mainstream media selects for sales and / or target audience bias / interests, ergo in that sense, I'm actually NOT hearing about important things by tuning in to traditional mainstream media. [2] People murdering each other due to orders from invisible people in the sky is going to be a soundtrack to my life thanks to the era I live in. I know this happens. It will continue to happen for my life at least. No, I don't need daily reminders of this universal constant. The way I conduct my life and my advocacy against such acts will not be altered because I don't get those daily reminders.

parennoob 12y ago

> If the bomb drops or christ returns then we have a warning system setup all over Sweden that wakes anyone up. How does the warning system work for the return of christ? Church bells?

TeMPOraL 12y ago

That's why I limited my news to Hacker News. Whenever there is an event that actually matters - like a war or a cataclysm - it will be here, upvoted and with comments made by people who know what they're talking about. I don't mind missing the 99% of the typical news sites content.

lordbusiness 12y ago
I've been running an experiment for the past several months to outsource relevant news curation. It's super simple and super passive. Basically I only read news brought to my attention organically; social media, word on the street which I later look up, etc. Thus far I haven't missed anything of genuine humanity-shaking importance, my emotional state has improved, and I have much more time for reading, hacking, and all other aspects of my life. It resonates with the "millennials consume news differently" piece submitted elsewhere on HN actually.
- Goronmon 12y ago
  Doesn't this experiment rely on a certain critical mass of people consuming information in a non-organic fashion?
  - lordbusiness 12y ago
    Not really, though I don't claim this has been a truly scientific study. :-) Generally, the principle relies on "if it's not important [1], people don't talk about it". In other words, anything someone directly or indirectly mentions to me may be of value, everything else is just soundtrack. [2] Further, I often find that news that does matter comes to me from the likes of a more considered periodical; I learnt a lot of fact-based detail regarding the Alberta oil sands from National Geographic, and I learn about peace process break downs from twitter users I follow far quicker and with less bias than from mainstream media outlets. Local news tends to be handled by random people I meet on the street. It's effective so far! [1] This is an overly burdened word in this context. Darfur is very important, but we rarely hear about it, for example. What I mean in this context is "relevant enough to daily life to stop me in my tracks and get my attention". It's worth highlighting here that a lot of very important news doesn't make it to us via mainstream media because mainstream media selects for sales and / or target audience bias / interests, ergo in that sense, I'm actually NOT hearing about important things by tuning in to traditional mainstream media. [2] People murdering each other due to orders from invisible people in the sky is going to be a soundtrack to my life thanks to the era I live in. I know this happens. It will continue to happen for my life at least. No, I don't need daily reminders of this universal constant. The way I conduct my life and my advocacy against such acts will not be altered because I don't get those daily reminders.