Approach to "News" Consumption

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
PhoebeCoco
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 6:33 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by PhoebeCoco »

Fclevz wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 10:21 am
nimo956 wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 9:11 am I no longer find reading the new a worthwhile use of my time. Instead, I focus on reading books, which includes longer and more detailed non-fiction history works.
You may find this interesting: Avoid News: Towards a Healthy News Diet By Rolf Dobelli
I enjoyed this article very much. Thanks for posting it.

Mr Money Mustache has a similar post - "The Low Information Diet"

https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10 ... tion-diet/

I do not watch or listen to the news. I do not want to be swayed by the good looks/sympathetic voices of newspeople. I do read the local news online and the NYT. I skip any articles that have a headline that contains the word "could"; this word indicates that they are mere speculation and not factual.
If you're not working on yourself, you're not working.
oxothuk
Posts: 546
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:35 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by oxothuk »

Shael_AT wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 6:33 pm I have a chip on my shoulder when people in media try to direct/steer, influence or tell me how or what to think.

For that reason, any of the personalities on ABC, NBC, CNBC and especially Fox & CNN are an absolute non starter for me. Being mindful of my own emotions has been a godsend, if someone is making me elated, joyous, ecstatic or fearful, anxious and angry, they are banned from my minds eye as a news source. These people and their corporate entities seek to influence what I think, how I behave, how I feel and where I spend my money.

No thank you!
+1
Very little of what gets reported in the “news” is actionable to me, nor is it likely to convince me to change long-held allegiances. Emotional manipulation is too high a price to pay for the paltry information content in the news.
ballons
Posts: 441
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:05 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by ballons »

  1. Your TV news in 1965 had the fairness doctrine.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

    --
  2. Your daily newspaper that you got in 1965 would cost with inflation about ~$0.85/day or ~$300/year today.
[Political comment removed by admin LadyGeek]
User avatar
Random Musings
Posts: 5799
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by Random Musings »

I take all news today with a grain of salt. More opinion than facts these days.

RM
I figure the odds be fifty-fifty I just might have something to say. FZ
folkher0
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 2:48 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by folkher0 »

In the US, the PBS NewsHour is the only televised news source I watch. I find it to be a good one hour recap on national and international news. I avoid the 24 hour networks.

For print media find and support your local paper. I avoid the opinion pages. I read it to stay up to date on local issues. Front page is rarely where the good stuff is. Realize that the paper is likely owned by a national conglomerate with bias or agenda.
User avatar
yatesd
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:19 am
Location: MD

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by yatesd »

I'll just add that once you accept the fact that all news is entertainment...a business that gets paid through viewership and ads, you at least understand why it is so polarizing.

Not sure how to fix it...my wish list:

- News would be independent of ad revenue
- Increased pushback from misleading article titles, "clickbait"
- Increased pushback from teaser titles on TV

Most people don't really think about it, but even the weather is purposely held back and teased multiple times to try and get you to watch more than 5 minutes of the local news.

My latest concern is large corporations trying to influence the news through their own version of political correctness.

Crowdfunded news like Facebook or Twitter could theoretically be better, except that the medium is optimized for short headlines, photos, and videos which almost always lack substance. Unfortunately most people don't seem to be attracted to in depth discussion based on facts, experience, and perspectives.
GreenLawn
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 10:58 am

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by GreenLawn »

I like the Wall Street Journal and the Economist. I use the WSJ for long form domestic reporting, and the London-based Economist to help balance the provincial nature of US reporting. I find most of the mainstream news outlets to be correct on the facts almost all of the time (in their news sections of course, not opinion) but skewed and selective on the context in which they present those facts. And context matters, a lot.

As an example of news without context, I present Florida, the state I recently moved to. Factually, Florida has plenty of sunshine, and it also rains frequently and heavily. I've maintained a green lawn over the last year having watered only 3 times. With the unrelenting (oppressive?) heat of Florida, that requires large amounts of rain distributed over the year, and that's what I've experienced. I've seen Florida described as the Sunshine State in the media for years, yet never once have I seen it labeled the Rain State. Yet, both are equally valid.

We moved here from the Northwest in part because my girlfriend was "tired of the rain". We were inundated with heavy tropical rain in the first month we were here, and I teased her mercilessly, until she made me stop:) So, I've personally experienced, and am paying for, skewed news reporting, but it is what it is, and we're making the necessary adjustments.
Beehave
Posts: 810
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:46 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by Beehave »

When the Soviet Union started allowing people to emigrate to the West, there was a spate of Soviet-era wit unleashed. One emigre said, "when Pravda reports a storm in the Urals, it means there was a plane crash."

If you understand the biases, you can often dig out the facts. The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
Dave55
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 2:51 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by Dave55 »

I read the Economist, AXIOS.com which attempts to be neutral and fact focused, NY Times, Washington Post, The Hill, Google News.

No TV news.

Dave
User avatar
whodidntante
Posts: 9131
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:11 pm
Location: outside the echo chamber

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by whodidntante »

No one wants to buy a newspaper anymore. So it's become Lord of the Flies.

🎶
Don't believe everything that you read
You get a parking violation and a maggot on your sleeve
/🎶
User avatar
Sandtrap
Posts: 11763
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:32 pm
Location: Hawaii No Ka Oi , N. Arizona

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by Sandtrap »

I do not watch any TV “news” or commentary or talk shows , or anything with spin.
Also, do not consume predigested information.
Careful parsing on the internet daily for local, domestic, and global, “information” (vs news) gives me an overview.
For example:
Read the transcripts not....." what someone said about it....".
Read the bill not “. “
Watch the Senate confirmation hearings and read data vs “...”
Read the economic, and other data, vs “...”
Read financial and investing numbers not “...”
Etc.

New information in the context of broad and deep and careful study of world history and behavioral psychology, etc, coupled with a flexible and open mind is a formidable combination. That, and the realization that one can never “know” but a tiny fraction of what is.

There’s a strong relationship between this and the “boglehead approach to investing.

With this, it is simple to spot cognitive bias in the sender and receiver of information.

Of 7.5 billion ants on an ant mound, we are but one.
j🌺
Last edited by Sandtrap on Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Wiki Bogleheads Wiki: Everything You Need to Know
dowse
Posts: 459
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:10 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by dowse »

We normally watch ABC Nighly News, but I'm really getting fed up with the format. They promote a number of stories at the opening, then go into about 15 min. straight. After that, they go into extreme commercial mode, spending only 15 seconds or so on a promoted story, then cutting to a commercial. It stays that way unitl the final human interest story at the end. It's infuriating. Alternatively, I sometimes watch the PBS News Hour. With a commercial-free hour, they have time to go into much more depth. Perhaps there is a bias, but much less so than other sources.
GreenLawn
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 10:58 am

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by GreenLawn »

whodidntante wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:30 am No one wants to buy a newspaper anymore. So it's become Lord of the Flies.

🎶
Don't believe everything that you read
You get a parking violation and a maggot on your sleeve
/🎶
That is the best succinct explanation I've run across to explain the current state of public discourse! I remember a quote I read long ago but can't find now: "A good newspaper is a poor man's university" I grew up with the Los Angeles Times, took hours to get through the Sunday edition. Sadly, daily newspapers in many cities have become little more than newsletters or syndicated repetition of national wire stories.

Many of the folks I run into (not wealthy or highly educated like Bogleheads) seem to get their news from Facebook. Wow!
palaheel
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:35 am

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by palaheel »

Sandtrap wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:42 am
Read the transcripts not what someone said about it.
Read the bill not “. “
Watch the Senate confirmation hearings and read data vs “...”
Read the economic, and other data, vs “...”
Read financial and investing numbers not “...”
Etc.
Also, several networks will post entire White House, State Department, et al briefings on youtube. They're not that long, especially sped up. They're much more interesting and informative than some pro- or anti- "whatever" version.
Markets crash. Markets recover. Inflation takes your money FOREVER.
GreenLawn
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 10:58 am

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by GreenLawn »

dowse wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:52 am We normally watch ABC Nighly News, but I'm really getting fed up with the format. They promote a number of stories at the opening, then go into about 15 min. straight. After that, they go into extreme commercial mode, spending only 15 seconds or so on a promoted story, then cutting to a commercial. It stays that way unitl the final human interest story at the end. It's infuriating. Alternatively, I sometimes watch the PBS News Hour. With a commercial-free hour, they have time to go into much more depth. Perhaps there is a bias, but much less so than other sources.
Love ABC Nightly News, so dramatic (is it the theme music?) and sensationalized :D Weekday news anchor is easy on the eyes too. I watched NBC and CBS to compare and I didn't feel the jolt. Anytime I can get 15 minutes of news without a commercial break on broadcast TV, I'm in! I skip the first 2 minutes of preview, and rarely have the patience to to slog through to the end, but for 15 minutes, I'm there.

ABC News is pretty grim stuff, a nightly feed of that for months could have psychological consequences down the road, so I don't watch it every night. PBS News is great, comes with a slant like all news, but when I'm looking for in depth reporting (Belorussian current events anyone?), PBS does the job.
User avatar
batpot
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:48 pm

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by batpot »

GreenLawn wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:15 am Many of the folks I run into seem to get their news from Facebook. Wow!
way more comfortable living inside a bubble.
User avatar
Topic Author
bhwabeck3533
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:25 am
Location: Baldwin County, AL

Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

Post by bhwabeck3533 »

As the "Original Poster", I want to say thank you for all the thoughtful responses to my challenge. As a summary I'd like to include a few themes:

DO's
  • Read vs listen
      Identify what you are passionate about
        Limit your intake (too much news can have a psychological impact)
          ID legitimate news (use Media Bias/Fact Check)
            Journalism standards have diminished (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine)
          Recommendations:
          • Avoid News: Towards a Healthy News Diet (by Rolf Dobelli)
            "On The Media" WNYC Podcast
            The Influencing Machine (by Brooke Gladstone)
            Low Information Diet (by Mr Money Mustache)

          Finally, there's not a shortage of sources for which we seek "our news":

          Adfontesmedia
          Allsides.com
          AP
          Apple News
          AXIOS.com
          Barron's
          BBC World News
          Bing
          Bloomberg
          BogleHeads
          Boston Globe
          Brietbart
          CNBC
          CNN
          DEU Public Broadcasting
          Economist
          El Pais
          Financial Times
          FlipBoard
          Fox
          Google News
          Harvard Crimson
          Lawfare
          MIT The Tech
          Morning Drive
          National Review
          NPR
          NY Post
          NY Times
          Old Reader
          PBS (UK feed)
          PBS News
          Real Clear Politics
          Reddit
          Reuters
          Rush Limbaugh
          SportsCenter
          Telluride Daily Planet
          The FlipSide
          The Hill
          The Onion
          Times of India
          Twitter
          Vice News
          Vox News
          Wall Street Journal
          Washington Post
          Wikipedia
          NJdad6
          Posts: 259
          Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:51 am

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by NJdad6 »

          Interesting topic and very well written responses. I have also tried to cut down on the time I spend watching and reading the news. So much of it has become commentary rather than factual information. Major outlets have lost credibility as they twist, alter or ignore stories.

          Something my grandfather told me in the late seventies (I was a little kid) took me decades to understand. He was born in 1896, joined the Army at 16, fought in the trenches in WWI and spent 20+ years as a NYC cop. He said “believe nothing that you read and half of what you see”.

          I keep this in mind no matter what news source I am reading/watching.
          oldfort
          Posts: 1758
          Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:45 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by oldfort »

          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:14 am The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
          If your largest involvement in the political process consists of casting a vote once every two years, there's a lot of what economist refer to as rational ignorance. If you don't have the power to change anything, it doesn't make sense to follow the minutiae, unless you find reading the newspaper or watching the nightly news enjoyable. This becomes more true if you live in a place, which is either solid blue, like California, or solid red, like Alabama.
          User avatar
          BogleFanGal
          Posts: 650
          Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:59 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by BogleFanGal »

          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:14 am When the Soviet Union started allowing people to emigrate to the West, there was a spate of Soviet-era wit unleashed. One emigre said, "when Pravda reports a storm in the Urals, it means there was a plane crash."

          If you understand the biases, you can often dig out the facts. The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
          Agreed. So many people proudly proclaim they avoid all news and it's quite sad to me. I was brought up to believe it was every person's responsibility to stay informed at local, state and national level vs sticking one's head in the sand for the purposes of making their own life easier and less stressful. And just because a news source is biased doesn't mean there's not some value there - just recognize the bias; think for yourself and arrive at your own conclusion.

          My parents knew the importance of staying informed from tragic experience, as millions in their native countries including all their own family members, were brutally murdered doing exactly that - continuing to pretend all was fine and sticking their head in the sand. "Oh that could never happen here" is the answer I usually get - almost always by Americans born here, whose parents and usually grandparents were born here too and are 100% clueless about what can happen when a country's long-time structure or stability unexpectedly changes. Their families said that in their countries too - before the you-know-what hit the fan!

          If everyone avoided the news the past 50 years, a lot of horrible injustices exposed would still be going on. Corrupt politicians your taxes pay to represent you in both parties couldn't care less about the consequences of their past or future actions, until bad optics from the 4th estate makes them care - because they have no other choice.

          I DO agree with limiting intake though....it's crazy now. Years ago there wasn't this 24/7 constantly screaming clickbait world with multiple channels assaulting you every min of the day. People got the news 1-2x a day...maybe morning paper and the evening TV broadcast.
          "Life would be infinitely happier if we could only be born at the age of eighty and gradually approach eighteen." Mark Twain
          oldfort
          Posts: 1758
          Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:45 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by oldfort »

          BogleFanGal wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 2:55 pm
          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:14 am When the Soviet Union started allowing people to emigrate to the West, there was a spate of Soviet-era wit unleashed. One emigre said, "when Pravda reports a storm in the Urals, it means there was a plane crash."

          If you understand the biases, you can often dig out the facts. The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
          Agreed. So many people proudly proclaim they avoid all news and it's quite sad to me. I was brought up to believe it was every person's responsibility to stay informed at local, state and national level vs sticking one's head in the sand for the purposes of making their own life easier and less stressful. .
          I think there's a lot more rational ignorance than you do. For example, I know very little about monetary policy, but I don't need to. I don't work for the Fed and make monetary policy decisions. I'm not the President or a Senator, so I don't get to select or confirm the people who do work for the Fed and make monetary policy decisions. As a Boglehead, I'm not going to market time the bond market based on where I think interest rates are going. If I was going to study monetary policy, it would almost purely be as a hobby and why have a hobby you don't enjoy?
          User avatar
          novolog
          Posts: 44
          Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:24 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by novolog »

          I read the following:

          WSJ - subscription I get for free through DW's job. I don't think I would pay for it on my own.
          Marginal Revolution - very sharp economics blog that is updated daily. Run by Tyler Cowen & Alex Tabarrok.
          Wikipedia - I cannot stop reading Wikipedia and the associated primary sources. It is almost like a drug.

          I avoid social media like the plague and we do not watch TV for news.

          I am 28 years old. My parents are late 50's and watch a great deal of cable TV and have recently been complaining to me that they "don't understand what is true and what is untrue anymore."

          My response is basically this:

          I think there has always been a "truth." Today there is a truth. Fifty years ago there was a truth. The media you consume is always going to warp your perception of that truth in one way or another (like viewing something through a lense). The issue is now there are many lenses to choose from (internet), and you have to decide for yourself which ones are best. My sense is that in the past there were fewer lenses (or even just one lense), and everybody used that same lense. It was perhaps harder to know if the single lense was warped because you had nothing to compare it to, so it may have seemed perfect at the time. Now with multiple lenses, you can see plain and simple that they are all warped. Today I can read Sputnik & Al Jazeera, and get a more genuine Russian or Middle Eastern perspective on the west, instead of relying on what the NYT tells me they think. In my experience, many folks are not used to learning about something through multiple lenses to get a better picture of what is "truth."

          Ironically, if you are willing to think critically and sift through, there is perhaps more information now to get a more complete image of the "truth" than there was before.
          User avatar
          abuss368
          Posts: 21627
          Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:33 pm
          Location: Where the water is warm, the drinks are cold, and I don't know the names of the players!
          Contact:

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by abuss368 »

          I read The Wall Street Journal

          I have actually cut down on other sources. I found it to be a waste of time.
          John C. Bogle: “Simplicity is the master key to financial success."
          7eight9
          Posts: 1450
          Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 7:11 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by 7eight9 »

          There are many on-line newspapers (Bangkok Post, South China Morning Post, etc.) as well as TV channels (France24, NHK World-Japan etc.) that one can access for free. Sometimes it is nice to get an international perspective on the news.
          I guess it all could be much worse. | They could be warming up my hearse.
          000
          Posts: 2818
          Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:04 am

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by 000 »

          Reading the news is like hiring a financial advisor.

          If one knows enough about the subject to know if the article is true, one does not need to read it; if not, one should not make any reliance on it.
          User avatar
          batpot
          Posts: 1175
          Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:48 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by batpot »

          oldfort wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 2:29 pm
          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:14 am The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
          If your largest involvement in the political process consists of casting a vote once every two years, there's a lot of what economist refer to as rational ignorance. If you don't have the power to change anything, it doesn't make sense to follow the minutiae, unless you find reading the newspaper or watching the nightly news enjoyable. This becomes more true if you live in a place, which is either solid blue, like California, or solid red, like Alabama.
          Good point.
          But it's quite possible to remain informed without watching 24/7 national news coverage.

          However, you can also THINK you're informed getting all of your news from Facebook.

          If you don't know what category you fall into, I'd refer you back to that Ad Fontes media chart.
          ronno2018
          Posts: 281
          Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:31 am

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by ronno2018 »

          Strummer wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 11:03 am I've always avoided TV news. I can get more information from a well-written newspaper article in a tenth of the time it would take a talking head to provide a less detailed report on the same subject. TV news had its peak relevance in the 60's and early 70's, before ABC gave Roone Arledge, president of their sports division, command over the news division with the idea that news could be a profit center, too. (Prior to this, all the networks viewed news reporting as a public service that would lose money.) Unfortunately, all the major networks followed suit and started treating news as info-tainment, and that dynamic was further exacerbated by the birth of the 24-hour cable news networks, which learned quickly from the OJ Simpson murder trial that crises generate good ratings, even if the crises are hyped or otherwise manufactured.

          Credibility is the gold standard of journalism; i.e., if you mis-report a story, you damage your credibility and reputation as a trusted voice. Outlets like Reuters and the AP are useful because they understand this, and therefore follow the standard protocols of good journalism: having multiple sources for a story, for example. NPR is generally pretty good at this stuff but their dependence on federal money for a significant portion of their funding means that they will sometimes show too much deference to whichever party is in power. I also like the BBC World Service for US coverage, because it's interesting to hear how the U.S. looks to reporters operating outside our media ecosystem.

          I have one other recommendation but before I make it, I want to make one distinction that is often overlooked in discussions like these. News coverage is completely different from opinion/editorial pieces. I think a lot of people read an editorial or news analysis piece and think, "Oh, this paper is biased." Yes, the point of those pieces is to express a particular point of view but no, it doesn't mean the paper itself is biased. If you don't make this distinction as a reader, you're going to find it very difficult to take anything useful away from your media consumption. With that in mind — because some will see this publication as biased, when it's not — I enjoy the Washington Post's national coverage a great deal. The paper's executive editor, Marty Baron, runs a tight ship and protects the paper's credibility vigilantly. (He was running the Boston Globe when that paper won a Pulitzer Prize for its reporting on the Boston Archdiocese sexual abuse scandal, which was later portrayed in the film "Spotlight.")

          For those who are interested in ongoing media analysis, I can recommend WNYC's show/podcast "On the Media," which analyses how stories are reported. One of its hosts, Brooke Gladstone, wrote a book (technically a graphic novel) called "The Influencing Machine" which breaks down the subject further.

          That's about it. OP, it's good that you're asking about this now. There's a ton of misinformation out there.
          +1

          also I enjoy "On the Media" but be aware they have gotten more shall we say "reality based" in the past few years. they may tone it down soon depending what changes before the end of the year... :beer
          User avatar
          BogleFanGal
          Posts: 650
          Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:59 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by BogleFanGal »

          Strummer wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 11:03 am I've always avoided TV news. I can get more information from a well-written newspaper article in a tenth of the time it would take a talking head to provide a less detailed report on the same subject. TV news had its peak relevance in the 60's and early 70's, before ABC gave Roone Arledge, president of their sports division, command over the news division with the idea that news could be a profit center, too. (Prior to this, all the networks viewed news reporting as a public service that would lose money.) Unfortunately, all the major networks followed suit and started treating news as info-tainment, and that dynamic was further exacerbated by the birth of the 24-hour cable news networks, which learned quickly from the OJ Simpson murder trial that crises generate good ratings, even if the crises are hyped or otherwise manufactured.

          Credibility is the gold standard of journalism; i.e., if you mis-report a story, you damage your credibility and reputation as a trusted voice. Outlets like Reuters and the AP are useful because they understand this, and therefore follow the standard protocols of good journalism: having multiple sources for a story, for example.
          +1 - great post - so true about how TV news changed - especially in the '70s: the films Network and Broadcast News really nailed it.

          "Credibility is the gold standard of journalism". That's the crux - editors (and audiences) used to be like junkyard dogs on a writer who didn't fact check, relied on one slanted source; left out or manipulated context; editorialized a news story; interjected their own reaction; or even overlooked mispellings/grammar mistakes. Papers or TV stations would be very embarassed and publicly apologize in a big way for mistakes that few would even notice or care about today.

          I miss the professional standard of ethics news outlets aspired to that I don't see as much - even from the "real" journalism publications. But of course papers back then were profitable because people valued the news: newsrooms had a robust staff of seasoned editors, reporters, writers and researchers - unlike many I see who call themselves "editors" "reporters" and "writers" in their bios, but whose main career training appears to be writing a personal blog or posting on facebook/twitter.
          "Life would be infinitely happier if we could only be born at the age of eighty and gradually approach eighteen." Mark Twain
          oldfort
          Posts: 1758
          Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:45 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by oldfort »

          batpot wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:29 pm
          oldfort wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 2:29 pm
          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:14 am The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
          If your largest involvement in the political process consists of casting a vote once every two years, there's a lot of what economist refer to as rational ignorance. If you don't have the power to change anything, it doesn't make sense to follow the minutiae, unless you find reading the newspaper or watching the nightly news enjoyable. This becomes more true if you live in a place, which is either solid blue, like California, or solid red, like Alabama.
          Good point.
          But it's quite possible to remain informed without watching 24/7 national news coverage.

          However, you can also THINK you're informed getting all of your news from Facebook.

          If you don't know what category you fall into, I'd refer you back to that Ad Fontes media chart.
          At a higher level though, is any of the information actionable? Assuming you care about politics enough to vote, here's a rhetorical thought experiment. What presidential candidate do you plan to vote for? What news could you conceivably read between now and when you vote, which could convince you to vote for the other candidate instead. The honest answer in most cases might be close to absolutely nothing.
          User avatar
          abuss368
          Posts: 21627
          Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:33 pm
          Location: Where the water is warm, the drinks are cold, and I don't know the names of the players!
          Contact:

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by abuss368 »

          Any news I read whether The Wall Street Journal or else has no impact to our portfolio. We simply enjoy reading the news.
          John C. Bogle: “Simplicity is the master key to financial success."
          Beehave
          Posts: 810
          Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:46 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by Beehave »

          oldfort wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:21 pm
          batpot wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:29 pm
          oldfort wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 2:29 pm
          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:14 am The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
          If your largest involvement in the political process consists of casting a vote once every two years, there's a lot of what economist refer to as rational ignorance. If you don't have the power to change anything, it doesn't make sense to follow the minutiae, unless you find reading the newspaper or watching the nightly news enjoyable. This becomes more true if you live in a place, which is either solid blue, like California, or solid red, like Alabama.
          Good point.
          But it's quite possible to remain informed without watching 24/7 national news coverage.

          However, you can also THINK you're informed getting all of your news from Facebook.

          If you don't know what category you fall into, I'd refer you back to that Ad Fontes media chart.
          At a higher level though, is any of the information actionable? Assuming you care about politics enough to vote, here's a rhetorical thought experiment. What presidential candidate do you plan to vote for? What news could you conceivably read between now and when you vote, which could convince you to vote for the other candidate instead. The honest answer in most cases might be close to absolutely nothing.
          Two things about bogleheads and this forum that are relevant to this topic.

          (1) For those suggesting that no news source is trustworthy because some of the reports end up unreliable - - that seems to me analogous to saying I won't invest in a stock index because some of the companies will fail and some will even have fraudulent reporting. My original point was that people can understand that news among reports some may contain errors or bias and still "profit" from investment their investment of time in sorting through it all.

          (2) Bogleheads post their thoughts because they believe they understand things and that their experience and understanding have value and matter not just to themselves, but to a community and that somehow there is a mutual responsibility to arrive at improved understanding.
          oldfort
          Posts: 1758
          Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:45 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by oldfort »

          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 7:06 pm
          oldfort wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:21 pm
          batpot wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:29 pm
          oldfort wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 2:29 pm
          Beehave wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:14 am The posts above in this thread indicating that avoiding the news yields happiness seem to me to be taking a position that abdicates our mutual responsibilies as citizens to be informed and help shape a good and just society.
          If your largest involvement in the political process consists of casting a vote once every two years, there's a lot of what economist refer to as rational ignorance. If you don't have the power to change anything, it doesn't make sense to follow the minutiae, unless you find reading the newspaper or watching the nightly news enjoyable. This becomes more true if you live in a place, which is either solid blue, like California, or solid red, like Alabama.
          Good point.
          But it's quite possible to remain informed without watching 24/7 national news coverage.

          However, you can also THINK you're informed getting all of your news from Facebook.

          If you don't know what category you fall into, I'd refer you back to that Ad Fontes media chart.
          At a higher level though, is any of the information actionable? Assuming you care about politics enough to vote, here's a rhetorical thought experiment. What presidential candidate do you plan to vote for? What news could you conceivably read between now and when you vote, which could convince you to vote for the other candidate instead. The honest answer in most cases might be close to absolutely nothing.
          Two things about bogleheads and this forum that are relevant to this topic.

          (1) For those suggesting that no news source is trustworthy because some of the reports end up unreliable - - that seems to me analogous to saying I won't invest in a stock index because some of the companies will fail and some will even have fraudulent reporting. My original point was that people can understand that news among reports some may contain errors or bias and still "profit" from investment their investment of time in sorting through it all.

          (2) Bogleheads post their thoughts because they believe they understand things and that their experience and understanding have value and matter not just to themselves, but to a community and that somehow there is a mutual responsibility to arrive at improved understanding.
          I'm not sure how either of those statements is relevant to my post you are quoting. I'm on this forum mostly because COVID-19 effects have given me a lot of free time to fill.
          Flyer24
          Moderator
          Posts: 2114
          Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:21 pm

          Re: Approach to "News" Consumption

          Post by Flyer24 »

          Thread has run its course. Topic is locked.
          Locked