Things you notice when you quit the news (2016)

Re:Things you notice when you quit the news (2016) by deltaonefour on Tuesday February 22, 2022 @01:22PM (#30431427)

My suggestion is don't even bother with the economist. It's news in more pretentious and intelligent packaging. It's honestly better than some other sources for sure, but that isn't the point.

The point isn't to find good sources of news. I think the point is that most news, no matter how good it is, is largely pointless.

I'll pick up the economist if something in it interests me. Otherwise I largely ignore all news.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Things you notice when you quit the news (2016) by foo92691 on Tuesday February 22, 2022 @02:56PM (#30432813)

The Economist is also like 100+ pages per week. Very hard to consume without significant dedication.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Things you notice when you quit the news (2016) by wolverine876 on Tuesday February 22, 2022 @05:49PM (#30434980)

Don't read every article?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Things you notice when you quit the news (2016) by ROTMetro on Tuesday February 22, 2022 @01:50PM (#30431875)

And it definitely is biased. It sadly very much "informs" you towards having the opinion it wants to promote which is what I think we are discussing getting away from.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Things you notice when you quit the news (2016) by cpach on Tuesday February 22, 2022 @01:53PM (#30431927)

If I may ask, what other publications do you recommend that you deem more objective? Do they also cover large swathes of the whole world, like The Economist does?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Things you notice when you quit the news (2016) by ROTMetro on Tuesday February 22, 2022 @06:45PM (#30435493)

I wish I knew some I would probably be less 'OMG everything has gotten horrible' overreacting.

[ Parent | on HN ]