Stop Reading The News!

Part 2

Since 2010 Dobelli claims that he has been entirely news free. He sees the effects in the form of greater focus, clearer thinking, more free time, less stress and more valuable insights.

But how could this be? Doesn't the news feed us important information?

Well, the news feeds us snippets of random events about international meetings, business scandals, awkward tweets, missile launches and so on. This breaking information tends to be extremely irrelevant to your own life. Do we really need to know about the cabinet reshuffle in Italy? Well, if you're not Italian, it is unlikely that such a piece of information truly is breaking news. And can you even name a single member of your own local cabinet? Let alone a local politician, somebody who actively impacts your daily existence.

Why do we care so much about irrelevant information?

We like knowledge and we are knowledge seekers. The more relevant the knowledge the better. Notably, the way that the news increasingly presents this knowledge is under the illusion that it is relevant. Hence, we hear phrases like ''Breaking News!'' to give us the sense that this is the most relevant thing that has happened right now. And, frankly, what's going on elsewhere usually seems more interesting and novel than whatever is happening in your own neighbourhood. So we gravitate towards these tidbits that taste palatable, but do nothing to satisfy our search for actual relevant knowledge. It keeps us hooked.

Dobelli compares the news to sugar which keeps us in a constant state of consumption. Even worse, like sugar, we tend to only become aware of the side effects until way later. Dobelli points to the fact that much of what the media fails to report on is the stuff that you'd actually wanna know about. For example, the release of the first internet browser on November 11th, 1993 wasn't reported on. What was? The Israeli pm meeting with Bill Clinton and the Pope fracturing his shoulder. As he argues, it is unlikely that the stuff that will impact us for decades to come will actually be talked about, most if it is largely irrelevant.

But how should one define relevance? Quite simply whatever allows you to make better decisions and allows you to understand the world better. This is one's circle of competence. Anything inside the circle is your area of expertise. Anything outside of the circle is something that you don't understand. Without preaching about becoming a complete specialist, it is usually more efficient to stick to the spots that you generally understand. This allows you to save time and allows you to go deep instead of broad. That is to deeply understand topic through reading longer form articles rather than short snippets that leave you enraged only to forget them moments later.

But you do need to know what's going on in the world, right?

The news gives us the facts of the world so we aren't just blissfully unaware of what's happening. However, Dobelli argues that these facts ''are usually no more than the consequences and side effects of deeper underlying causes.'' If anything, this constant influx of disparate news stories only further confuses your idea of what's going on. Usually you just end up with an overwhelming sense that everything is happening and you have no idea why.

''News corporations and consumers both fall prey to the same mistake, confusing the presentation of facts with insights into the functional context of the world.''

Dobelli argues that we should read books and long articles if we truly wish to understand what is happening and do justice to the complexity of the world around us.