On the back of the BBC thread I started thinking about the proportion of the population that currently don’t get exposed to news and current affairs. My wife is one of them.

Does not buy or read a newspaper
Does not watch the news on TV (very very rarely watches live tv so would rarely accidentally watch it either because it happens to be on)
Does not listen to radio 4 (I listen avidly though mainly with headphone when she is in)
Consumes all her music via Spotify so does not even hear what passes for the news on a music channel
Never goes to a news based website like the BBC

Her only consumption of news is probably through ‘shares’ on social media and most of those are highly selective or links to commentary on it rather than the cold hard facts to make her own mind up from. She is intelligent, articulate and degree level educated in a professional job but has remarkably little knowledge of the world in which she lives.

I would contend she is pretty typical of a huge chunk of society now. Could it be that in a world that is more connected and accessible than at any time in history we are more isolated (generally as a nation) from the goings on at a global and national level than we have been for generations? Depressing.

edit – I should have said that despite this she has an opinion on Brexit, Scottish independence and political party to vote for. Lord know what these opinions are based on. But as they are broadly in line with my own it’s not a hornets’ next I propose to poke by challenging her ‘right’ to have an opinion!

May be it’s depressing Instead constantly being fed all the carp that is in the news, so avoiding it totally is best for mental health

“cold hard facts” I think this is part of the problem.
There is no news outlet that I know of that doesn’t put their own spin on facts.

I’m increasingly in that category these days to be honest. Most of the news seems a constant stream of doom and gloom. Sensationalist nonsense, written in such a way to trigger their desired audience.

I’m increasingly in the “**** it” category. I’ll worry about issues within my sphere of influence and do what I can to ensure my family are well set to ride out whatever tomorrow may bring.

“cold hard facts” I think this is part of the problem.
There is no news outlet that I know of that doesn’t put their own spin on facts.

Whilst there will always be argument about the bias of the BBC and other mainstream I’d say the main spin something like the BBC website will put is what to report and the priority the story is given. The death the Qasem Soleimani for example – BBC headline and content are relatively non sensational with background info on who he was. Now compare to the headline in the DM and Express or some of the facebook stuff floating around. Or some of the Guardian opinion pieces I have read since. The BBC’s effort is close enough to cold hard facts for me for it to be compulsory reading before moving to the rest. Or indeed nothing else.

One of my resolutions this year is to expose myself to less in the way of news for the same reasons as I left Facebook; the posts are curated, as is the news, to obtain and retain your attention by eliciting an emotional response.

I don’t think this type of manipulation is useful or without consequence, so I’ll be on a low information diet and informing myself using alternative sources as required – maybe your wife is doing similar?

im the same as your wife really, dont watch or read any for the reasons given above. its doom and gloom, and everyone spins it to suit their own agenda.

youll laugh, but my main source of news is this forum 😀

I’m trying to limit mine, mainly for my sanity and mental health. I look at BBC news once every morning and try to avoid news beyond that. I’ve made sure my twitter feed is curated to be not news stuff, you get the odd retweet but that’s OK. My view is that for the vast majority of stuff there’s sod all I can do about it so why worry?

youll laugh, but my main source of news is this forum 😀

This place definitely plays a large part for me too.

does it actually matter? I do read the news a lot, but I’d suggest that less than 1% of stuff in the news affects me in any way. If I didn’t read it at all, it would not impact me in any meaningful way.

Reuters Institute does lots of research into these sorts of topics.

Interesting so far.

So for those that actively (or are electively in the future) minimising their exposure beyond what they think effects them or their ‘sphere of influence’ – would there be grounds do you think that you should also refrain from voting given you are electively naive/ignorant?

I can’t imagine wanting to be informed as much as possible about the world around me but can see it is choice that can be made although I feel it should come at a price.

Apparently, my new year’s resolution is to be your wife. :oD

Up until the election result last month, I spent a huge (and I mean HUGE) chunk of my day reading news online (both domestic and US based) listening to R4, with either CNN or BBC News 24 on in the background while I worked. It was the first thing I did in the morning, and the last thing I did before I went to sleep.

There was so much shit happening around the world that I thought I needed to stay on top of, that I was becoming obsessive about it. A lot of it was making me angry too, and there was seemingly very little that I could personally do to change it.

So, mid-December, I decided I needed to change all that for my own mental health. So, I just stopped doing reading/watching/listening. Cold turkey style.

Since then I’ve not followed any news at all. I rarely watched any live TV, and still don’t. I did listen to Spotify a lot, but I’ve now supplemented that with 6 Music as a replacement for CNN/BBC24, and this is probably now where I get all my ‘news’, albeit a pretty watered-down bulletin every 30 mins or so.

For the record, I got rid of my Facebook account a couple of years ago (as in actually, fully deleted it and everything it contained), and I don’t really use any other social media – so I’m not exposed to anything manipulative in that respect.

In just under a month of doing this, I’ve found that I’m thinking about bikes and surfing and travel a hell of a lot more (three things I used to do a lot before I had kids)… and the other part of my plan is to find more time to get out and do more of all three in earnest this year – starting this week, in fact.

I feel like a proper weight has been lifted. I’m just generally more relaxed. I’m happier. And I’m probably waaay nicer to be around, too.

I recommend it.

so I’ll be on a low information diet and informing myself using alternative sources as required – maybe your wife is doing similar?

It’s nothing that deliberate. I think she was previously an accidental news consumer. Traditions and culture have changed and her exposure has dwindled. We used to buy a paper at the weekends. From her perspective it was for a tv guide but the news was physically sitting in print on the table but we don’t now. Music was partly consumed by radio so she heard to bulletins. The best TV shows were often just before or after the news. It’s those changes that has made her more isolated and she does not care enough to make an effort to replace the old sources.

I feel like a proper weight has been lifted. I’m just generally more relaxed.

same. i also did the same with football. up until 15 years or so ago it was a big part of my life, pissed off when my team lost, an accumulator each week, “ooooh only 1 off a few hundred quid”, watching games that i had no interest in the winner and being pissed off at all the cheating and swearing at the ref, so i drew a line in the sand and said ‘thats it, no more, i dont care if any team wins or loses, im not watching it any more, footballs gone.
and like the news, i feel better for it and that theres more ‘room in my head’.

would there be grounds do you think that you should also refrain from voting given you are electively naive/ignorant?

in my case no, im happy that i can make informed decisions from reading the ‘big threads’ on here 😀
and what about all those that just believe everything that they read/hear/watch on bbc or in the daily mail/sun/mirror etc, or from facebook feeds, theyre probably more ignorant than us that dont read/hear/watch anything at all 😀

So for those that actively (or are electively in the future) minimising their exposure beyond what they think effects them or their ‘sphere of influence’ – would there be grounds do you think that you should also refrain from voting given you are electively naive/ignorant?

Well a general election isn’t something that sneaks up on you – you generally have a bit of notice. :o)

I’d like to think that I’m intelligent enough to make a voting decision based on whatever information is available to me at the time (or throughout an election campaign period), and right now I don’t feel that I need to spend the next 5 years before the next general election closely following politics so that I can make an informed choice at the voting booth.

I also believe that there’s a fair bit of ideology involved in voting too, as in there’s at least one party I’ll never vote for, regardless of how much news I’ve watched/not watched!

But that’s another discussion for another day. Or maybe not, in my case.

May be it’s depressing Instead constantly being fed all the carp that is in the news, so avoiding it totally is best for mental health

I did read a mental well-being article that did suggest that the constant barrage of negativity and conflict in a very sensational way can be detrimental to mental health. I turned off 5-Live, don’t read on-line newspapers with the very occasional glance at the Guardian. Avoid all tabloid newspapers like the plague and I do feel “better”.

Commuting by train and working in an office environment, I am alarmed by the number of people who seem to get their daily news fix from the Daily Hate or the Heil-on-line.

My wife finds the news depressing, so avoids it. Personally it doesn’t bother me, although I mainly stick to economics/business/finance stuff as I’m more interested in that.

I’ve stopped watching the news after the election, mostly, do still look at BBC website news sometimes but, frankly I cant change it, my opinions on politics are pretty fixed in that I hate tory policies and so whats the point me knowing what Trump, Boris, Putin and all the other facktards are up to, it just stresses me out.

Count me as another one who avoids it. It’s just utterly depressing and as others have stated it is pretty much always presented with a bias. I don’t watch normal TV, don’t listen to the radio and don’t actively read newspapers / news on-line.

It’s the best way in my opinion. If something major happens it’s basically impossible not to hear about it from somewhere. Why shouldn’t I be allowed to vote though? I can make an informed opinion on a political party and their manifesto without having to be guided by a broadsheet, tabloid or presenter.

May be it’s depressing Instead constantly being fed all the carp that is in the news, so avoiding it totally is best for mental health

This for me

MIL reads the Daily Wail and believes everything in it, then spends her days repeating it to all who will listen.

I too am now reducing my news intake, as I don’t believe much of the reporting and find it all ‘too much, too often, too narrow a view’.

A question for those who do consume lots of noise, what benefit do you feel you have from being very informed in it?

I’ve been on a total news detox since Dec 12th, feel better for it 👍

A question for those who do consume lots of noise, what benefit do you feel you have from being very informed in it?

I think you have put your finger on it already. I don’t see it as noise.

I think it gives a sense of perspective. For example chuntering about your bin being collected only every two weeks feels a bit small fry when 12 million hectares of Australia is burning (this was a piece of news my wife was entirely ignorant of).

Also a lot of global and nation events are played out over a long time. The nuance is lost if you just heard a 10 second summary at the end of a 6 month process.

The word noise was actually a typo, should have been news!

Also a lot of global and nation events are played out over a long time. The nuance is lost if you just heard a 10 second summary at the end of a 6 month process.

Understand, but how does that knowledge benefit you? I get the concept that people like to feel informed, but I struggle as to the benefit to them of having that knowledge.

What ops’ 1st reply was

WORD!

Plus a little bonus as I don’t vote as do not deal well with disappointment as feel the need to spit dummy out on a bicycle forum

🤪

A question for those who do consume lots of noise, what benefit do you feel you have from being very informed in it?

I think reading the news helps me to recognise the noise and filter it out.
Despite the genuine concerns about bias and misinformation, there is still a lot of good, reliable information out there, and it is not difficult to find. I’m curious about the world I live in, I want to know what is going on, and I want to be able to make informed decisions.
It’s not an academic discussion, and trying to understand what is going on has real practical consequences. You can see that over the last 3 years and the recent General Election. An awful lot of people seemed quite comfortable admitting that they made no attempt to read up on the issues that were being debated (and had no interest in doing so). That is pretty shocking, because it means that facts are devalued, and people without scruples can gain the upper hand by just telling the lies that people want to hear.

I don’t tend to actively read the news.

Yet key events do make their way to me via tea shack chat and I’ll go research on those that interest /affect me.

I don’t actively read it as there’s so much that is reported and so little can be controlled or influenced in anyway by me.

It just strikes me as a way to keep you living in fear of what “could” happen to you.

You have to have nothing to lose to be willfully ignorant, whether it’s due to being at rock bottom or in a position of privilege. I’m selective with what I consume, the local news tends to be filled with assaults, robberies and a token feel good story about a charity that’s doing the job our taxes should pay for. It let’s me know what’s happening in my community and if I should carry a rape alarm. I do like to know what’s going on in the world though, that information forms what food choices I make, how much my fuel is going to cost, where to buy my clothes…

I’ve stopped bothering with many of my sources of news since the election and feel better for it, more chilled out.

Spending 5 years tying yourself up in knots so you can spot a turd on polling day is a poor strategy. Be the good and the change you want to see in the world, volunteer for something, write some letters, emails to influential people on issues that matter to you. Disabuse yourself of the notion that liking or retweeting will achieve anything. Talk to people.

Also the news has been rubbish since they stopped having tits in it.

The news is depressing, so I don’t bother. Same with voting.

I read the big threads on here and another forum that gives me a broad base of arguments for me to digest.

Everything else, **** it – don’t trust most of them. Gotten very cynical over the last 5 years. Might help that I’ve emigrated and the news has another different slant again.

I think the way news is reported is inherently bad for our mental health. It focuses exclusively on the negative and reinforces the almost unconscious notion that terrible things are always happening and that these things will affect you directly, which, of course, is untrue.

I think that it’s possible to remain informed without overdosing on news programmes – just drastically limit your exposure to them.

JP

I think I’m probably not alone in more-or-less completely avoiding the news. The closest I get is a quick browse through the BBC website on a Friday lunchtime to see how well/badly I can do at the quiz of the week’s news when I haven’t read any of the articles. I got 7/7 right one well, that was a surprise.

Especially in recent years though, with 90% of everything being related to Brexit or the elections, I’ve found myself more and more disengaged from the news. I still vote, as I believe you should, so I voted for the local candidate whose values seemed to match my own – not for Boris/Jeremy/Nigel etc, none of them were standing in my constituency, and it’s an election not a popularity contest. I won’t say seeing the news was ‘depressing’, but it became abundantly clear that nothing will ever be straight facts, every outlet has their bias and flaws, and therefore none can ever be 100% trustworthy. That’s a shame.

I would particularly say I’ve lost any faith in the BBC, unfortunately. The biggest issue seems to be them slavishly following an incorrect dictionary definition of ‘impartiality’: supposedly giving equal airtime to all parties (or at least the two main ones) is one of the things causing the most issues. I wholeheartedly agree with whoever created the meme thingy that said “if one politician says it’s sunny and another says it’s raining, it’s not your job to report on both, it’s your job to look out the window and work out which one of them is telling the truth…” but that hasn’t happened, no major outlet was calling politicians, of any party, out when they lied. I would see that as the BBC’s remit, but they won’t do it. That’s a shame as well.

Is it also a shame that that frustration means I’m out of touch with world events? Yes, I suppose it is. I hear about things through other sources – here, other social media, office chat etc – and I’ll research things via multiple sources if I find them interesting or important. But I think it’s less frustrating and yes, maybe a little bit better for my mental health, not to get to caught up in the news and the frustration that comes with it. I can still be a half-decent human being without it, so that will have to do.

I watch Channel 4 news a couple times a week and thats it. There too much propaganda creeping in and frankly, a load of balls being reported as well.

As we continue to lean towards American standards in almost every part of UK culture, it’s no shocker that the news has deminished to such a level that most people don’t believe a lot of whats reported.

It’s not so much being insulated from the news, but realising that traditional news does not exist any more, just the spin on the world/UK/local events that suits the proprietor of whatever the outlet is.

Once upon a time I used to buy The Times regularly because it was a paper that reported the news reasonably accurately and confined its editorial spin to the editorial section. That was a long time ago now.

The advantage of social media is very often links will be provided, and it’s easy to chase up a matter of interest.

I’m pretty much like the op’s wife (different hairstyle mind) although I listen to Six Music so get stuff from there, plus unfortunately also hear Jeremy Vine when my colleague gets radio rights. I also get my news from here where I can be selective and follow the links I want to find out more about.

Essentially, humans are dicks. I don’t see any need to have this confirmed to me at regular intervals throughout the day.

My mum is absolutely obsessed by news, glued to Twitter for hours on end about Brexit and politicians, and the rest of the time has Radio 4 on. To me it’s like watching Eastenders. Horrible and depressing content but content that you’re invested in and want to know where it’ll go next, so have to keep watching.

Horrible.

For example chuntering about your bin being collected only every two weeks feels a bit small fry when 12 million hectares of Australia is burning (this was a piece of news my wife was entirely ignorant of).

How would her life be enriched if she had known about this two weeks earlier? It’s clearly bad for those involved, it’s obviously devastating, at least in the short term, for wildlife, and is probably a bad sign for the planet. BUT how does knowing this make one woman on the other side of the world in any better/worse situation than not knowing?

Why do you presume that the story you do know about, which happens to be from a commonwealth country, where white English speaking people predominate, and that is well connected digitally is THE news story she should know about? As world affairs go, was it really the only thing happening between BJ getting elected and Trump assisinating Iranian Generals? Or had much of the media decided they deserved two weeks off?