- In the past few decades, the fortunate among us have recognised the hazards of living with an overabundance of food (obesity, diabetes) and have started to change our diets. But most of us do not yet understand that news is to the mind what sugar is to the body. News is easy to digest. The media feeds us small bites of trivial matter, tidbits that don't really concern our lives and don't require thinking. That's why we experience almost no saturation. Unlike reading books and long magazine articles (which require thinking), we can swallow limitless quantities of news flashes, which are bright-coloured candies for the mind. Today, we have reached the same point in relation to information that we faced 20 years ago in regard to food. We are beginning to recognise how toxic news can be.
With the exception of the fact that journalism is in the midst of a disruptive crisis of economy and thus only the rich and powerful can afford to pay journalists ... that is not a reason to become the Idiocracy. The problem is that we refuse to take our fight to the gates of power themselves ... instead we now click upvote/like/dislike/whatever on some digital content and we feel like we accomplished something when nothing has changed. "News misleads." So does my vision at times ... I will not gouge out my eyes for it, though. "News is irrelevant" A dismissal based on personal opinion and made up stats? "News has no explanatory power." Ironically I have no words to describe the vapid ass-hattery of the above statement. "News is toxic to your body." /puts down Bloody Mary, opens up bag of potato chips "News increases cognitive errors." Yes ... by increasing cognition. It is how cognition works. "News inhibits thinking." News, if given to a community of people that have real, face to face interactions, increase the discourse of the community. I'm not going to waste my time cherry-picking social-science-experiments. "News works like a drug." AND DRUGS ARE BAD .... MUHAHAHAHA! Unless you are sick, malnourished, elderly, or have a suppressed immune system. "News wastes time." I'd like to be the one that figures out how to value my time, thank you. "News makes us passive." No ... the internet makes us passive. The news is now delivered on the internet instead of a paper, though. "News kills creativity." Except for the writers, the photographers, the editors, and the layout people that news uses to deliver its message. But they aren't real creatives, right?
I was most amused by the fact that this was published on a news website. Unless it was published for satirical reasons, which is entirely possible. Honestly, it reads like a segment of a self-help book, probably because it appears to have come from one. "Don't do these things for the reasons that I give without providing much explanation behind them". The only part that I disagree with you on is that the internet makes us passive. It really depends on how you use it, same with everything else. The internet has been a very proactive and engaging thing for me on a lot of fronts (making personal and business connections, getting in touch with bands, promotion companies, and record labels, etc).
Not a well founded article, but worth consideration to me. The times I've been away from the news for a week or more, I survived. Ignorant and happy.
In addition, there have been numerous times I've read the morning news and been frustrated with political happenings that affect my career, but were well out of my immediate control. Probably better to hear these stories later in the day or not at all. I'd still be the same person I am now, possibly a bit less frustrated.
No news, outside of the sports section, will be my plan for the next two weeks, or more. Hubski doesn't count though. The content here is too thought-provoking and engaging.
I have slowly stopped watching the news a year ago. Anything that's really important I'll hear through other people anyway. Frankly, I don't think I miss much. Most of it seems to be a passing hype anyway. I'd rather devote my time, effort and memory to people and causes I care about, like here, than on passively absorbing information that loses its value as soon as it isn't new anymore.
I don't watch the news. In fact, I can't tell you the last time I did. My parents watch "Jon Stewart" and for the past few nights I've caught his show. -I could watch that nightly. Pretty funny stuff and you get the premise of the most pressing news. But yeah, I agree that if it's important enough news it will find me via other outlets.