Newspapers: Do you still read them?
Muddy
USA
Not even too too long ago being on a train it seemed like everyone had their head buried in a newspaper. You just don't see it as much, now it's the phone which might still be a newspaper but how should I know.
I read the New York Post everyday on my phone now (it's free) but I used to grab the paper everyday when it was a lot cheaper. Every once in a while if I have time to sit down, or I'm at some deli, I still take a paper version, There's just something special about having a coffee and just reading the scores, standings, stories of whatever happened yesterday. As I got older I stopped reading back to front and started reading front to back. But at the end of the day I still have a newspaper to go to, do you guys? If it's gone what did you read and what are you reading now to get the news?
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
31 comments
Latest
One thing I've noticed over the last few years though...in the 90s as an adolescent asshole / teenager, daily I would go over the front page, local section, headlines in business section, and front to back in sports... I feel like I knew a LOT more back then about current events, and I absolutely knew more about teams, rosters, stats, and standings.
I can find out breaking news instantly now, but at the cost of additional information.
But damn do I miss sitting on the couch, not knowing what happened the night before, flipping pages, and going through all the transactions, standings, box scores...
Sadly, "print is dead"
-Spengler
There's a lot of good information out there from a variety of think tanks and other organizations. So, by way of my phone or computer screen, I'm no longer limited to what's on the newsstand.
One of the downsides of online news is that people are able to put an incredibly narrow focus on the stories they read and the political viewpoint from which they're written. With a physical newspaper, the simple act of scanning an entire page could lead you to read story by a journalist that you would more likely not even see if reading online. Online news also makes it incredibly easy for readers to only select news (and sometimes "news") that is tailored to their existing confirmation biases (be it conservative or liberal). And that's not great.
For me, I think there are two downsides to going digital for news. First, as El Duderino said, I used to be more up on sports. I would study the box scores, standings, stats and so forth. It was an enjoyable way to start my day. Now, I tend to browse a strip club site instead. Second, I need to very consciously make myself unplug from time to time. I realize how addicted I am to the fucking screen when I do and I’m not happy about that.
I also think that the echo chamber danger that others have mentioned is real. But I’ve always sought out a wide variety of sources and viewpoints and am slow to draw conclusions just because someone expressed something. So if anything, online information has caused me to become even more skeptical and cautious about viewpoint bias than I was in the days of print.
With paper news, once you hit the back page, you had to go do something else. With online news, you can go down a rabbit hole all day long and beyond.
Whatever happened to all the paperboys?
Today my next door neighbors are the only ones on my street still getting home delivery. I get all my needs from the internet.
To hell with most legacy newspapers which are just tendentious crap. NYT and WaPo in particular aren't just biased, they're straight up agents of the left.
I no longer read a newspaper. I use the online version of WSJ primarily as my news source. I used to read the Sunday NYT - but it’s no longer worthwhile.
In NJ there is a paper The Star Ledger - and I haven’t read the paper version in about 10 years.
SJG
Love having a 10" tablet for news, Kindle for books.
home of the first spearmint rhino and tropical lei.
For regular news, it’s a hodgepodge. Reason shows up on my social media feed the most often tho
SJG
SJG