The news is informative. That is, it not only informs you of  news, but it also informs you of what you’re supposed to find important. Not only news that is important, but what in the news is important. Consider this New Yorker article about teachers cheating their students’ standardized test scores. Those details which would otherwise bring immediate clarity to the situation in one of Atlanta’s “failing” schools are only ever hinted at in the most remote fashion. What details do make it through the filter of liberal conscience  are enough to tell us all we need to know. What is almost fantastic is the obvious steps taken to remove acquaintance with evidence that contradicts the blank slate worldview.

There is little reason to believe any New Yorker article will represent a disproportionately differing view from the one linked above. Were any such view respected enough to be allowed to be promoted amongst the New Yorker staff, such a view would have already made its way into that article, The complete lack of reference to more specific demographic data, the avoidance of racial descriptions (especially where they would’ve been relevant to forming a complete picture), comparison to schools with similar background, anything which would’ve disconfirmed the standard social science model which was undoubtedly drum into these writers since birth. It’s spooky the way in which the progressive worldview can so reliably steer itself away from falsification, dragging  the inquiring mind along with it.

And that’s why I don’t read the news. The dis- and misinformation is annoying. That’s not to say I won’t take the occasional venture, but usually less in order to be read as news and more as something else. The ideological persuasion of a piece is a curious phenomenon to witness and can become the main draw of the piece. But it can’t be enjoyed except as a rare treat; otherwise, it is a bothersome labor.

How do I know what’s going on? To a large extent, I don’t, but this is less a correlate to my lack of news reading but to the lack of correlation between what’s going on and the news. There is simply no reason to trust the news. They are as  invested in forwarding some particular version of events as any politician. The only source of news I would tend to defer to is Theden, but then again in that case I have a good acquaintance with both the writers and their priors.  Outside that, I too readily expect some narrative to be refuted by the next cycle to get attached to any view of events told in the news.

So why try? There are many things besides the news that are worth keeping up with. Sociology studies are much harder to spin, and then there’s always attending to the ever-growing stack of philosophy books. Perhaps there is some remote chance I will be disadvantaged by a less than meticulous effort of reading the news, but living news free has proved costless.