Wednesday, December 11, 2013

News is bad for you – and giving up reading it will make you happier

News is bad for you – and giving up reading it will make you happier, article

Can I just say... THANK YOU! I've been saying this for years and years.
(I'm living it too, mostly. A couple years ago I tried getting a newspaper, it was a good one too. But it was just too boring, there was so little I was interested in.)
Some famous writer said "try living without a newspaper for a couple months, you will feel better."
Amazing to find this article on a newspaper's web site!

My stance is that "news" content just manipulates your emotions (usually to depression or fear) without giving you any data which are useful. If that wasn't bad enough, they are unreliable to the point of surrealism. Talk to some people who have been in the paper, they usually tell you that they hardly recognized the story.

The article has several good points, here are a couple:

News misleads. Take the following event (borrowed from Nassim Taleb). A car drives over a bridge, and the bridge collapses. What does the news media focus on? The car. The person in the car. Where he came from. Where he planned to go. How he experienced the crash (if he survived). But that is all irrelevant. What's relevant? The structural stability of the bridge. That's the underlying risk that has been lurking, and could lurk in other bridges. But the car is flashy, it's dramatic, it's a person (non-abstract), and it's news that's cheap to produce. [...]

News is irrelevant. Out of the approximately 10,000 news stories you have read in the last 12 months, name one that – because you consumed it – allowed you to make a better decision about a serious matter affecting your life, your career or your business. The point is: the consumption of news is irrelevant to you. But people find it very difficult to recognise what's relevant. [...] 

News is toxic to your body. It constantly triggers the limbic system. Panicky stories spur the release of cascades of glucocorticoid (cortisol). [...] In other words, your body finds itself in a state of chronic stress.


Read it here

I think part of why we are addicted (not an idle term) to the news is that we don't dare look away.
It is like if there's a lot of noise and commotion down the street, we feel compelled to check up on, for what if it's something which might threaten us?
Only there is always noise and commotion somewhere, and we can't do anything about most of it, so having the news bring it to our face is self-defeating.

And by the way, I think this is why I dislike Facebook (and such) so much: it has so many things in common with the news; the time sink characteristic, the superficiality, the unreliability...

Update:

Bruce W. said...
... I read news from several sources, including several non-US news sources (e.g. British, Russian, and others). The different points of view on the same "story" are astounding. Like the story of the three blind men each touching a different part of the elephant.

Couldn't agree more.
The amazing thing is that somehow the news media have managed to build in a circuit in our heads that says they are neutral and objective. "If it says so in the paper it's true" is often said sarcastically, but there would be no need to say it if we didn't somehow believe it.

And even if they *tried* to be objective, which I think they rarely even think about, then it's just not possible. Complex issues by nature look different based on your viewpoint and background.

Update:
Graham said:

I've managed to give up news media for short periods such as for a long weekend when I had to go into hospital for an operation a couple of years ago. 

But for longer periods that that, I'd be worried that I was missing out on knowing something I needed to know about what was going on locally or in the world. I'd be interested in learning from other people as to how they deal with that anxiety.

10 comments:

  1. Agreed! For years I've watched as little televised news as possible. Somehow I still know what's going on.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yep.

    For a year, once, I had a job which was very quiet in the afternoon, and there were newspapers around, so I read them. But after that year, I could not tell of a single instance all that reading had given me anything I really needed or could use in life.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Absolutely agree!

    But FAR more important in this decade is to get people to stop WATCHING news! The pictures distract from the essence, and the words are always far off just as your quotes say.

    And this is from a news junkie - always NPR on and listening even late at night when I can't sleep... Gee, I wonder why I can't sleep!?!

    I gave up TV years ago - but it seems more and more interweb news contains video, even worse than reading it. I suggest you add to the blog something about watching news, which is completely self defeating, more than radio, more than newspapers...

    ReplyDelete
  4. My guess is that giving up the internet will make many people happier. But I've yet to seriously try it. I like my morning paper, but it's mostly local stuff.

    Sometimes happiness is not all we need, though. A little dissatisfaction and anger might be needed to get things done, and that's what good reporting can provide.

    ReplyDelete
  5. There is not enough interesting news to fill a 24-hour news cycle. So news outlets either need to (a) trump up non-stories to seem important, or (b) be the first to report on anything remotely interesting that happens. In scenario (b), you can sure s hell count on all the details being wrong at first. Ergo, screw the news, it's not even news any more.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mike, Lancashire12 Dec 2013, 10:35:00

    What winds me up is the discussion at 8:00am on what MIGHT be in some report or announcement due at 10:00am. Totally pointless - I have no problem in waiting for the real thing!
    Then there is the 'up-to-date' rolling news with the same features repeated ad nauseam all through the day.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I do read the news quite a bit. I find it does keep me informed about the large decisions I have to make, like when I vote, buy health insurance and so on. But relying on a single news source is bad; no matter how hard they may try (and usually they don't even try) it is biased and only one point of view. Thus, I read news from several sources, including several non-US news sources (e.g. British, Russian, and others). The different points of view on the same "story" are astounding. Like the story of the three blind men each touching a different part of the elephant.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Couldn't agree more.
    The amazing thing is that somehow the newsmedia have managed to build in a circuit in our heads that they are neutral and objective. "If it says so in the paper it's true" is often said sarcastically, but there would be no need to say it if we didn't somehow believe it.

    And even if they *tried* to be objective, which I think they rarely even think about, then it's just not possible. Complex issues by nature look different based on your viewpoint and background.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dear Eolake,

    Good comment. I've managed to give up news media for short periods such as for a long weekend when I had to go into hospital for an operation a couple of years ago.

    But for longer periods that that, I'd be worried that I was missing out on knowing something I needed to know about what was going on locally or in the world. I'd be interested in learning from other people as to how they deal with that anxiety.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I've put it in the post, let's see what happens.

    *** Graham, both your comments today went into Blogger's spam filter! I have no idea why. Try to find out if you are blacklisted or what.

    ReplyDelete