[sjw987]

I think it's important to keep reading the news occasionally.

Personally, I, as a programmer, read the news in the same way as my grandad who was a farmer. I read a printed weekly publication (in my case The Economist) on Sunday morning. Outside of Sunday morning I don't read the news at all.

I prefer printed news to media-supported news, because I think the imagery (I acknowledge The Economist still has images) and presentation of news, especially on TV detracts from the message it's trying to convey a lot of the time. After reading some of Neil Postman's books (notably Amusing Ourselves to Death), I find it strange to watch televised news whereby one minute I'm watching footage of a disaster, then the next minute I'm seeing sports news updates or an advert. Just like normal learning, I think news demands longer form content for proper understanding.

Reading the news on a low frequency basis also gives time for news stories to properly develop. Breaking news can be filled with speculation and incorrect details, which even if you keep up with, you can miss later corrections or crucial details. Not to mention the stress involved in it. Chances are if some real breaking news happens, like a natural disaster or war, I'll hear somebody else tell me.

[sotix]

If anyone is interested in keeping up with current events in a manner closer to "reading the history" rather than reading the news, check out Wikipedia's Current Events portal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events

[Sammi]

I read a few days down and stopped once I realized that absolute zero percent of any of it was useful information for me as a Northern European and all of it was terrible news. I don't think it's helpful for anybody that I know these things, while it is actually detrimental for my ability to be of service to other because of how it drains me.

[afpx]

I talk to enough people to tell me when something is important enough to know. I assume that's how news used to be transferred.

[conductr]

Older men in my family jokingly called it “the history” instead of “the news” and I feel it’s much more preferable than trying to keep a real time pulse in everything going on in the world

[sjw987]

Good point. My grandad used to call it the history as well!

[keyringlight]

I think it's worth keeping something like the serenity prayer in mind, there's a wide range in how relevant different types of news are to each of us, and how it affects us or we affect it. Between the various types 24 hour news they seem to encourage a mindset that you need to stay on the firehose and be informed, which stepping back a bit any profession will try to highlight what they offer is of utmost importance. What underlies that and makes me uncomfortable is news as entertainment, even if it's in the background as opposed to something like music, the constant drip feed of negativity or hazard.

[m463]

you could read wikipedia news:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events

[Tarq0n]

While the presentation has merit, the events listed on this page at the time of this comment don't meet the my bar of one of:

1) Essential to not have missed for everyday conversation;

2) Will affect my decision making in some way;

3) Will be remembered a year later.

There is simply far too much news.

[assimpleaspossi]

How does Wikipedia rank compared to news gathered by professional journalists and editors such as those at The Economist as mentioned?

[bbuff27]

TIL, thanks!

[pendenthistory]

I would like a weekly physical Sunday paper with some general news and printed substack articles tailored to me.

[mghackerlady]

Subscribe to a few RSS feeds you like, and set up a cron job or something to send an assortment of them to your printer every sunday

[appplication]

I’ve been kicking around an idea for a while now that’s basically a no-headlines, curated (generally long-form) media aggregation site. No algorithm, no personalization, no AI. Just topics you can choose to follow.

The basic idea is you get one article at a time fed to you (no headline scrolling like Reddit or HN), and doesn’t let you proceed to the next article until you’ve scrolled through at least x% of the current article or spent a minimum time threshold reading it. Maybe allow a limited number of “skips” per day if the content really isn’t for you. Basically the idea is to force you to slow down and actually engage with the content by removing mechanisms that promote mindless scrolling and dopamine rush.

[SSLy]

the closest thing is doing that to an epub to be sent to your e-paper device.

[btreecat]

I think it's hard to claim you're not getting news other than on Sunday in print, if your posting to HN mid-week.

[Deanallen]

Wouldn’t print newspapers also show you disaster on one page and sports on the next?

I just began reading amusing ourselves to death.

[sjw987]

Depends on the publication.

I read The Economist, which doesn't cover sports at all.

It's mostly 1-2 page long articles for each story, blocked into categories (UK, Europe, US, The Americas, Asia, China, Business, Finance, Tech, Culture at the end).

[james-bcn]

The Economist rocks. They also have a wonderful daily summary of the news that takes five mins to read.

[tmcz26]

Would that be this? Just checking:

https://www.economist.com/the-world-in-brief

[fransje26]

> The Economist

Speaking of an anger-inducing publication..

[1vuio0pswjnm7]

"Outside of Sunday morning I don't read the news at all."

Excerpt from comment submitted to Hacker News, an online news aggregator

On Wednesday

Is Hacker News news

[mghackerlady]

It's a domain specific news I guess

[direwolf20]

no it's propaganda for a startup factory