News and Current Affairs

[RGC]

I'm fed up with sensationalised negativity being shoved down my neck. So, I'm experimenting with avoiding the news altogether. I'm aware of the response some will have to this, but interested to know if anyone here (honestly) shares this position.

[Friendly]

I haven't watched the crap that is called news on tv in years. There is no benefit in having this sort of "information", it doesn't broaden your horizon or improve your life. It's really just noise with no informational value. Instead I check what's going on using the internet, getting in-depth information on subjects that really matter (to me).

Remember how I posted a thread about tuna fish going extinct due to over-consumption? That's the kind of information I'd want reported. However, most people care only about bullshit, while our corporate overlords want us to be nice little consumer-drones that don't think. The "news" are crafted accordingly. Best to avoid them.

So I voted "Actively disinterested. E.g., I find it all boring/depressing.", even though that doesn't really fit. I find 90% of what the media considers "news" quite useless/a waste of time.

[njiska]

I tend to read a lot of news and unlike most people my age I'm not bitter and jaded about it. One of the most important facts to consider when reading any source of news (TV, Radio, Internet, Gossip and Hearsay) is to pay attention to the bias of the publication. If a story interests me I try to read about it from a number of conflicting sources, rather than just the one that matches my political ideology. I like to be informed of the world around me, both locally and globally. Sensationalism sucks, but not all news is sensationalist. The stuff that is, like reports from US news networks and incredibly biased papers (The Sun here in Canada, the Daily Mail in the UK), are taken with a grain of salt.

[DEL]

The only channel I trust for news is Russia Today and the only other place I can get smatterings of real news is Youtube.
Everything else is controlled.

[Skykid]

The only channel I trust for news is Russia Today and the only other place I can get smatterings of real news is Youtube.
Everything else is controlled.

Correct. All TV news, even (especially) the world renowned BBC produces stories based on a broader political agenda. That means that your point of view and public opinion in general is skewed.

Russia Today is still controlled tho DEL. It is the alternative news channel it says it is and it does produce very relevant alternate views on many hot topics, but it has a fierce anti-American agenda and is clearly pro-Kremlin. That's not to say it has no value - there are few other mainstream news channels that will dish the dirt on US policy and the underlying reasons for their actions with such unashamed candour, but they're clearly far from neutral.

[DragonInstall]

The only channel I trust for news is Russia Today
Everything else is controlled.

lol.

Honestly I can't really think of any news that doesn't have some sort of agenda. Not that you can blame them... nobody can really just be neutral about everything.

[jonny5]

I'm generally indifferent unless it has a direct impact on me personally.

I don't watch the news or TV in general.

I pretty much try and ignore everything outside my bubble/scope.

And I don't vote cuz...indifference.

[JBC]

[Krimzon Kitzune]

I'm fed up with sensationalised negativity being shoved down my neck. So, I'm experimenting with avoiding the news altogether. I'm aware of the response some will have to this, but interested to know if anyone here (honestly) shares this position.

I agree with you, buddy.

[CIT]

I keep up with the news from various different sources several times a day. It's important for my job, but I also believe personally that it's essential if you want to have a part in shaping the world we're living in.

[Acid King]

I read a handful of publications across the ideological spectrum simply because no one publication covers all the issues I'm interested in. The partisan bickering doesn't interest me so I mostly just read informative pieces and policy research. The news, as covered by most media, isn't needed to be an informed voter because the information it provides is lacking and complex issues are simplistically presented. You're better off familiarizing yourself with the debate amongst policy nerds than reading the news if you want to make an informed choice between two policy positions.

[DJ Incompetent]

I wish I knew who was doing the news right. I don't know where to get the news anymore.
I just catch a feed on Politifact. Occasionally I'll hear what Young Turks or Al Jazera has to say. Maybe BBC if it's about American things. I do run Daily Show and Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, but mostly in terms of what to think about; not what actually happened.

I do like Intelligence Squared podcast on NPR. I haven't suspected it to be rigged, yet.

My current theory is news about your country is better reported from outside your country.

[RGC]

Thanks for the responses. It's good to know I'm not alone in my distrust, even if in my case it's about distrusting broadcasters to report a balanced selection of significant events that do not evoke purely negative emotional responses -- whether they be boredom or depression. To me, it's not representative of anything I can relate to. I suppose as with anything that is dramatised heavily and bombarded perpetually enough, eventually most people will succumb and get emotively drawn in.

Reminds me of that Bill Hicks routine about watching news 24/7, and hearing about "War!", "Death!", "Famine!", "Murder!", "War!", "Corruption!", "Death!", "War!", "Murder!", then he opens a window and just hears crickets.

As for unbiased truth...well, as someone else said, everyone indeed has an angle, right? I almost envy those with the patience and willingness to play Columbo in order to get past all that agenda-driven deceit.

[Skykid]

Maybe BBC if it's about American things...

My current theory is news about your country is better reported from outside your country.

That's true, but going to the BBC for American things is a bit like going to Rupert Murdoch for American things. Same difference, just one pretends to be smarter and not biased ('pretends' being the operative word.)

[BulletMagnet]

It's been awhile since I last read that particular strip, though I seem to remember the last two panels concluding on a rather different note than the first two.

That's true, but going to the BBC for American things is a bit like going to Rupert Murdoch for American things.

You could always just ask yourself "which one is being investigated for a phone hacking scandal, and which isn't"?

[TransatlanticFoe]

The news usually makes me angry through lazy journalism and total bullshit. Particularly when a report starts with "a new study says" and goes on to talk about risk factors in vague, nonsensical, but ultimately terrifying to the layman, terms.

Whilst I have little time for the pathetic mudslinging which passes for politics or the downright corrupt and completely batshit crazy financial system, they do govern how the world works - so I find it important to pay attention.

[Vexorg]

I stopped watching any TV news channels years ago, I can't stand them. Do you ever notice that the only people out there who seem to be interested in participating in public nudity are the ones who should never be seen naked in public? Well, the same theory seems to hold for a lot of the people who end up as journalists. I find I get all the news I need from reading one local TV station's website (and I choose that one mostly since they seem to have the best weather people, but they usually stick to reasonably neutral reporting aside from one or two crank editorialists) and a couple of Blogs. Mostly all I care about is that there isn't anything that's going to mess up my commute.

The part that's really annoying me right now is that a portion of my commute is on shuttle buses provided by my employer, and it seems that a number of the drivers find it necessary to play the local NPR station at excessively loud (as in loud enough that headphones at full volume can't entirely drown it out) volume during the ride. NPR seems to be less a news and information channel these days, and more a purveyor of validation of one specific and very narrow worldview. I can't say I'd be too bummed out if Congress voted to defund 'em.

[JBC]

Found it, although from my perspective the punch line doesn't nullify the original panels' message nearly as much as it punctuates it.

[BulletMagnet]

Heh, so it was only one panel: I seem to recall some line about Calvin's favorite TV show being on, it musta been a different strip.

I'll still take this one for the occasion at hand, though.

[Ed Oscuro]

NPR seems to be less a news and information channel these days, and more a purveyor of validation of one specific and very narrow worldview. I can't say I'd be too bummed out if Congress voted to defund 'em.

I listen to NPR almost exclusively during my travels (including commutes at all sorts of times depending on the schedule)...I can't fathom why you would think that. But hey, this guy repeatedly called NPR fascist. Is that pleasant, open-minded company for you?

The alternatives to NPR stations (and NPR stations are actually rather varied here) seem to be single-guy outfits, or the Bob & Tom show, or Christian radio talk shows. For "print" news I'm much more varied - but unless you have a satellite radio you are probably stuck to NPR, but I'm not so sure that's a bad thing (except on weekends, full of useless nonsense and the occasional laugh from Prairie Home Companion).

There are occasionally gaffes on NPR (the Juan Williams fiasco), sure. However, I suspect (i.e., know) that the same jackasses who won't vote the millage for their local public schools would love to take this away from those of us who use this, too, just so they can save a couple cents over their lives. And it wouldn't hit NPR badly - or save the taxpayers much, either; they only get around 2% of their funding from the federal government, which you'd realize if you ever listened to an NPR station and heard the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation spots, the MacArthur Foundation spots, and all the local plugs, not to mention the daily sponsorships and so on: "viewers like you," as it's called on PBS.

The irony, which is lost on many right-wingers, is that NPR is almost wholly privately or corporately sponsored, and its listeners are upper-middle class. In short, it should be seen as a free market success by libertarians, and a bastion of the values Charles Murray would argue are critical to America's success. So why don't more libertarians and the like love NPR?

What the incompetent Republicans would actually hit with a defunding bill is Public Television - programs like Sesame Street - which has a pro-gay agenda, as we all know. No more Kermit or Elmo for the kids, then; not to mention Cookie himself is bummed out about that whole broccoli mandate thing.

The attacks don't achieve even that - at least not so far, but with the troubling current infatuation with the "if something rubs you wrong, explode it" approach to policy, it's hard to be so sure they won't eventually succeed in doing some damage. Or, at the least, the public-minded Republicans will find that, after right-wing operatives obligingly concoct a topic for a Congressional hearing out of thin air, they can use it as leverage against NPR for better coverage and more ample time on air (I can't find it now, but very recently there was an amusing article on "the five steps to not defunding NPR" at either Slate or Politico).

I love this chart.

But back to public media - In case you've no clue how or why it is important, you could hear it from the man himself, Mister Rogers.

If that's not enough to convince you that your "narrow worldview" slight on public media is off target, then you could look at this entry of a long-running commentary section by a longtime Michigan journalist, who says he stopped watching TV "except for documentaries -- when Mr. Ed was cancelled," in other words, before Mister Rogers' 1969 appearance. Incidentally, Jack Lessenberry has been my #1 driver for interest in the ongoing problems with transparency in Michigan governance, and especially the political dealings and shenanigans related to the Ambassador Bridge, its holding company, and the holding family, the Morouns. In media, diversity does not mean that everybody ought to be plugged into the 24 hour news cycle and constant battles for the large market share of public media spurred on by economic interests and their figureheads slotted into hour-long talk shows dressed up as news (interestingly, though, Glenn Beck's site Blaze ended up being the source for debunking the Mark Schiller tape, as noted above at Mother Jones; on the other hand, Bill O'Reilly was central to the Juan Williams firing controversy and he has publicly called for the defunding of NPR and PBS, as if he could be an impartial observer in the mess). At a time when even CNN is cynically feeding off "citizen journalism" by owning their sources royalty-free so that the network doesn't have to pay for more shoes on pavement, NPR is in my estimation one of the few sources that does truly in-depth reporting, and their approach to television news has been cooperative, not divisive - giving many well-known names from print journalism regular appearances on their commentary shows.

[chempop]

I keep up with the news from various different sources several times a day. It's important for my job, but I also believe personally that it's essential if you want to have a part in shaping the world we're living in.

I feel rather differently about that last part. My job influences many many people in the community, for the better I might add, but it wouldn't necessarily make a difference if I was any more or less informed on current events and politics.

[DJ Incompetent]

...

Good post.

Where do you go to learn about the Michigan news nowadays?

[Daigohji]

The only news stories that interest me are scientific advances, and the only Times I read is the Fortean Times. I want to hear about us taking a step forward as a species and expanding our horizons, not stepping on each other's faces and aiming missiles at other nations' horizons.

[Ed Oscuro]

MUCH REJOICING!

Jamie Dimon about ready to cry

Ahh, if only it had been BofA or somebody else. Still...

...

Good post.

Where do you go to learn about the Michigan news nowadays?

Mostly NPR really.

There are some good online "print" sources - Detroit Free Press (freep.com I think) and I believe Mlive.com is okay.

I was astonished to hear that my local rag's (the Gannett-owned Battle Creek Enquirer) reporting got mentioned in an Environment Report topic today.

But really, if you just listen to two things - the Environment Report and the five minute Jack Lessenberry segment every day, you will probably be out there ahead of 95% of the rest in MI coverage.

[Moniker]

After a prolonged withdrawal from the news (mostly prompted by peripheral factors), some months ago I decided to check out the Times.


I got as far as the phrase "jobless recovery."

[Randorama]

What Acid King and Friendly said.

[xbl0x180]

With annoying, vapid c***s, such as erin burnett, melissa harris, and soledad o'brien, presenting, hosting, or reading news, how can one not give a damn about the news and current affairs? There are no standards for "journalism" on teevee that the career choice itself is maybe a few steps above crackwhore