should we keep following the news cycle, or disengage?
-
i've been considering fully disengaging from the news cycle lately. it's giving me quite a lot of anxiety at a time i otherwise have all the reasons to enjoy.
the thing is, i also value staying informed. i know this could be taken to the extreme with instant push updates of partial information, but that wasn't actually the case for me - i read my news on rss with usually at least a day's delay.
but with the double-pronged attack that is the state of things both in the US and in Israel, both places i have people near and dear to me affected by the news, this may have become too much.another big question for me is if i cut back, by how much. do i just cut back Haaretz? do i also cut back Local Call and Erin in the Morning (both of which i financially support because i appreciate their coverage)? what about the comedically-depressing news podcasts i listen to? or the overviews over at TLDR? and what about local news here in Czechia? the more i think about it, the less i can find a clear line of what should go, which makes me thing everything should go. is that too much?
i've changed the dosage of news in my life over the years, but never disengaged completely. but with the world being so anxiety inducing right now, maybe it's time to fully block out all the things i can't change, and focus only on the (few) things i can.
-
I limit myself but only completely disengage on Shabbat. Basically I take a look (at the Times of Israel mainly) in the morning and don’t look again unless I’m in the right mood.
When it comes to some things I’ve found accepting that there’s nothing I can do to change it has really helped (at that moment - for example the hostage releases on Shabbat).
-
just got this in my Masto feed
https://mastodon.world/@davidho/114000926819112091
-
@talya said in should we keep following the news cycle, or disengage?:
another big question for me is if i cut back, by how much
This isn't a question you need to answer going in. Two approaches I can think of: Drop it all for a few days for a rest, see what it is you miss the most and add a few back until you find a better balance. Or go in the other direction and cut or limit them gradually.
I'm personally avoiding speculation as much as I can - some of the political podcasts are so bad for that - and sticking more to later analysis of facts. I do more looking in than regular listening/reading too, and then pay more attention when something has actually happened.
-
I am really torn because I don't feel like we can afford apathy. How much is it necessary to be informed on the latest and greatest news to know what is needed to be done by me? Probably not much. Ok the other hand, were not going to live to witness something like this again (although we might be watching this unfold for the rest of our lives).
Either way, the events here did get me away from always checking need in Israel, for example.
-
So I feel conflicted in saying this, but for many years now, I have been advocating privately that people probably shouldn't be reading the news.
What do I mean by this? I mean, I think the news can often give someone the illusion of being well-informed. And it's really hard to be informed by the news. The information is being given in these bite-sized pieces. Thanks to inverted pyramid it will always be devoid of context even when you choose to read the whole article, which most people don't. Most people don't even read past the headline which often is misleading itself.
So what benefits from this context-less format? Day-to-day events. Things like a tree blocking the road. Or a major fire that needs to be dealt with. Which is to say local news. I think it makes lots of sense to support local news. It still suffers from all the issues I talked about, but that's less of a big deal for much of what it is covering.
Now if you are entertained by the news, no shame in reading it. But if you want to be informed I think you need a different strategy. The only one I can recommend that reliably works is "read primary sources" and read books that cite primary sources. Everything else is basically trading off knowledge for added convenience
-
on the one hand, you are probably correct. on the other, it is exactly those sources whose articles i read most deeply (Erin In The Morning, שיחה מקומית) that are the most depressing.
coming back to this thread a few weeks later though, i say that one new insight i got is that i realised i was essentially experiencing news burnout, with very similar effects to classical burnout. disengaging for a time definitely made the "oh no am i disengaging forever now?" thoughts way more quiet, and i'm actually quite happy in my state of still be over 300 articles behind in my RSS feed. i do still think i need to change my media diet, but i also think just pulling back for like as little as three weeks made it way better.
-
If it's any consolation, positive events are under-reported in the news since it isn't seen as newsworthy. This actually can fuel right-wing political projects. It's very easy to publish stories about violence and crime. But then you look at the statistics and crime has been steadily falling for decades. I almost certain this doesn't apply to the news you are referring to as depressing, but it's something to keep in mind. At least to maintain perspective.
