Relevant: <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-is-as-follows-you" rel="nofollow">http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gel...</a><p>> Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.<p>Journalists are people who know little of anything writing about everything.
Thoreau: "We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate. Either is in such a predicament as the man who was earnest to be introduced to a distinguished deaf woman, but when he was presented, and one end of her ear trumpet was put into his hand, had nothing to say. As if the main object were to talk fast and not to talk sensibly. We are eager to tunnel under the Atlantic and bring the Old World some weeks nearer to the New; but perchance the first news that will leak through into the broad, flapping American ear will be that the Princess Adelaide has the whooping cough."
"I think following the news is a waste of time."<p>I'm sure this plaid a role in him being so productive.<p>But I do think its my obligation to read the news. Even if it makes me less productive. Without the news I would have never learned about Aarons hack and his trial.
Of course, just knowing the news is not enough. One has to act. In the case of Aaron, we didn't act.
I think it's funny that the article about the news being irrelevant ends with the cliched tagline: "You should follow me on Twitter."<p>Because <i>that</i> would be relevant.
I've found myself feeling the same way since 2008 about the news. After 9/11, I was consumed by talk radio, talking heads, blogs of varying opinions, but ultimately found that I wasn't being more useful and informed...I was becoming angry, quick to judge, and worst of all, less intelligent and analytical with my decisions.<p>Being in the tech field, we're trained daily to evaluate competing, languages, and technologies not only on their own merits, but how closely they relate to our way of thinking. Most importantly, we tend to be <i>willing</i> to accept this change.<p>Since no longer being immersed in news, I spend time reading thins of value that either make me feel good, or something that I can apply for the betterment of myself or others. When elections come about, I do my research, cast a vote, and perhaps contact the office of the elected when news trickles down to me about a bill I want input on.
I've avoided newspapers for a couple of years, for much the same reasons described here. I still read a monthly news magazine, sometimes a weekly one. I find reading an international edition helps a lot (whether of a foreign or domestic news source) - less of the ins and outs of day-to-day politics and crime, which really don't enhance my life.<p>What's left are two kinds of stories - actual "news", by which I mean events that are more unusual and important; the kind of content that will be history in the future. This... feels like it affects me; I would prefer to read the history books about it, but they're not written yet, and I want to know now while there's still time to do something about it. If I'm going to change the world, even at the very limited level of making a product that makes some people's lives easier, that will probably be made possible because of some new piece of information; waiting until it's accepted wisdom is too late.<p>The other kind is features that are "still true", that aren't particularly time-sensitive. Things I could just as well read a book about, indeed. But my experience is that short essays are much better than books, to the extent that many of my favourite "books" are nothing more than collections of essays or newspaper columns. Likewise in fiction (and one thing that drives my choice of magazine is that it includes fiction), short stories are often more compelling and impactful than long ones.
Similar sentiments from a brother several thousand years ago:<p>"...I start up out of dreams and am disturbed, trembling at every message, with my own peace of mind depending upon letters not my own. Someone has arrived from Rome. 'If only there is no bad news!' But how can anything bad for <i>you</i> happen in a place, if you are not there? Someone arrives from Greece. 'If only there is no bad news!' In this way for <i>you</i> every place can cause misfortune. Isn't it enough for you to be miserable where you are? Must you needs be miserable even beyond the seas, and by letter?"
A large part of my day to day job involves summarizing political careers from thousands of pages of news articles.<p>As a general rule, I find that for every thousand pages of news copy, one can usually distill about thirty pages of useful facts (the rest being redundant, speculative, filler, or otherwise unimportant).
Besides always having something to talk about when meeting with people, reading the news is an exercise in critical thinking and analysis. Distilling a narrative from various sources about remote subjects is a skill that is applicable to yourself. If you can understand the narratives you hear on you may gain the skills to understand your immediate circumstances.<p>tl;dr Critical thinking is good for you!
"Not about me." Richly ironic, that.<p>But he was right. I feel much better about life when I don't read the news - and I'm typically far more productive during those periods when I manage to abstain.
I think it's important to look at some events as they unfold, vs. in retrospect, even if only to train yourself.<p>Pick a historical event (say, the assassination which kicked off WW1). Read news in chronological order, as it came out. See how different things seem at any point in time vs. how they look retrospectively a century later.
Wow, great find. Thank you for sharing. This is why I love Hacker News, one of the best things on the front page right now! Something that takes me outside my comfort zone and makes me think. These past two days have been some of Hacker News' best.
I haven't watched television for like 10 years now and I only spend time on news sites. But recently I realised how much time I just waste on the news instead and how little I gain.<p>I could have learned more about python or read a good book about an important subject. News is like junkfood for the mind. Very short topics that are not relevant to my life.<p>Sometimes I read articles about rape or other injustice and those topics just infuriate me, but I'm totally powerless. News exhaust me.<p>It has no value for me whatsoever. I can't recall that I ever made any important decision based on it.<p>This article is so true. When journalist write about a topic you know a lot about, there are often so many errors, that you wonder how many errors there are in topics you don't know about.<p>If you read the news as a hobby, sure, be my guest. But that's something else.
<p><pre><code> Let us look at the front page of today’s New
York Times....there is a story about
Republicans feuding among themselves.... a
photo of soldiers in Iraq. A stock exchange
chief must return $100M... a concern about
some doctors over-selling a nerve testing
system... a threat from China against North
Korea... a report that violence in Iraq is
rising. And there is concern about virtual
science classes replacing real ones.
None of these stories have relevance to my
life. Reading them may be enjoyable, but it’s
an enjoyable waste of time. They will have no
impact on my actions one way or another.
</code></pre>
Considering the defining cause of Aaron's life, and apparently the straw that pushed him to end, turned out to be information liberation, including freeing access to legal and science documents, the latter strongly tied to "virtual science classes", I'd say Aaron misjudged the relevance of news to his life.<p>I absolutely agree that <i>most</i> news is immaterial. That said, having lived over twice Aaron's age when he wrote this essay, what I've found is that sometimes the news <i>does</i> affect me, occasionally directly. Not terribly often, but I've had bosses nominated to government office by presidents, companies I work for turn up in major fraud investigations, former colleagues sentenced to Federal prison, acquaintances convicted of murder. Understanding economic patterns can help guide decisions and actions. Even weather and traffic can be useful at times.<p><i>This doesn't mean that Fox News blaring in the corner is the best way to assimilate this information.</i> Even selecting more fair and balanced (to say nothing of appropriate and informative) sources, I find myself switching from voice to music (increasingly classical) simply to avoid driving myself to distraction.<p>But a brief, well-curated, reliable news source can be both broadening and useful. Key is to let it serve, not drive you. It need not be a daily habit (though it often is).<p>I've also had numerous inspirations from "softer" programming via NPR and similar outlets -- culture, arts, and science programming can re-frame or contextualize problems I'm working on, and remind me that there are worlds outside my own experience (check your biases, always a first source of errors).
related, possibly of interest:<p>[1] R. Dobelli. Avoid News. Aug 2010. --> <a href="http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Part1_TEXT.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Par...</a><p>[2] C. A. Johnson. The Information Diet: A Case for Conscious Consumption. O’Reilly, 2012.<p>i myself am conflicted about the news. i agree with most of the negative points both by OP and the above; but i also feel i actually do learn something from the news, esp. as i have a relatively organized note-taking system, file and reference articles above a certain threshold of interest in bibdesk, etc.<p>i think the reason i learn something is that i take the 5 secs to take a screenshot or copy-paste the relevant snippets of information in my system. over time, you can see interesting patterns. sometimes, i run across a reference to some other, deeper source of information (presumably the background material the high-level news article was based on), and file a to-do to check it out in my task manager. usually i wouldn't have thought of this source or reference if i hadn't seen it cited in the news. last but not least, just scanning the headlines and summaries can give you a sense of what the hivemind of "the market" (or "the public") is preoccupied with at the moment.<p>so, at least to me, it's not all bad and yet i agree that it often feels like a waste of time and mental energy. i haven't figured out a solution yet but completely quitting the news is not going to cut it for me.
"There is voting, of course, but to become an informed voter all one needs to do is read a short guide about the candidates and issues before the election."<p>For one thing this places enormous trust in the guide-writers. For another it enormously oversimplifies the topics on which the guides would touch.
I found this paper by Rolf Dobelli to be very insightful. It was a TED talk a long time ago, back when that meant a little more.<p><a href="http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Part1_TEXT.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://dobelli.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Avoid_News_Par...</a>
"[The news'] obsession with the criminal and the deviant makes us less trusting people. Its obsession with the hurry of the day-to-day makes us less reflective thinkers. Its obsession with surfaces makes us shallow."
I gave up main stream news 4 years ago and I pretty much only read tech news. However, I find that important news still bubble up to me quickly through other channels such as word of mouth and through the tech news feeds. And I find that none of my time is wasted by worthless news, such as partison bickering, the latest traffic accident on I-35 or celebrity gossip. You should try it.
I completely disagree with Aaron, but I respect his opinion. Reading the news is incredibly important, and it shapes your understanding of culture and circumstances outside your social bubble, which in turn affects your future social interactions.
Felt the same way this morning when I caught a few minutes of This Week, covering the next "fiscal cliff", the lack of women in Obama's cabinet, and so on. What a waste of time.
I don't read news anymore (two years now), only watch tech shows in my "niche".<p>But some say perception is reality, so maybe it's smart to be in the know from time to time.
The problem with this theory is that when a person who follows the news hears a few minutes of Rush Limbaugh or reads something from naturalnews.com they realize pretty quickly that it's bullshit.<p>The people who fall for that stuff always seem to be uninformed about current events or get it only from warped sources. You can extrapolate that to nazis or communism or wherever but the bottom line is an uninformed populace is easy pickings for ambitious bad guys.