The press in general that is, not just this thread.

An article, ironically, in the press

I'd need to see more studies into all those studies mentioned

I learn a lot from the news I wouldn't otherwise have known (or have time to read up on properly, giving me a gist which is still more than I started with!), and it often takes my thinking places it wouldn't have gone otherwise. Either way, it ain't Facebook

For most people they know very little about a lot of things and so have the potential to learn about things that they hear in the news. It is one way we decide who to vote for. Though we do need the news to be impartial, otherwise it is simply propaganda.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

TBH, proper news is not problematic. The issue is to do with spin and media-hype. A true story can be spun and fed until it only vaguely resembles the truth. Sensationalism is the problem.

"OMG aspirin will make you bleed to death"
"OMG aspirin will prevent you from getting cancer"
"OMG doctors are crap"
"OMG this person was stupid"

Etc. I deliberately avoid the Daily Fail. The only time I read it is if I'm bored and there are no nails nearby to stick into my eyes. At which point I get wound up enough to get out of my slump.

I believe there is a web page which lists

a) The things the Daily Express has said will cause you to get cancer.
b) The things the Daily Express has said will stop you getting cancer.
c) The things which have at some point appeared on both lists.

I'm thinking wine and Guinness...

That doesn't mean you have cancer, it means you're an alcoholic.

If it is the Daily Express where would these appear? I thought that most stories had something to do with Princess Diana?

No no, ONE study definitely said there was a POSSIBLE link...

I totally agree with the article.

Nearly all reported news is irrelevant to me, I'm much happier in my ignorance.

Also I don't think that access to news stories helps people to be better informed. They are just able to spout a wider range of propaganda.

I read the news to pass the time at work.
I only read it half as much at home.

Newspapers. Somebody else's opinion of what may or may not have happened yesterday.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

I think that applies if you only read one source of news. if you read from a larger number then it can eliminate the various bias of each news paper and you get closer to the truth.

It's true. Practically all the news is irrelevant to you. In exactly the same way that more or less everything Oxfam does also is.

I have often noticed that people who spend their time discussing Eastenders and Coronation Street are far more intelligent than those who take an interest in such trivial [LIFTED] as the progress of African elections.

I have often noticed that people who spend their time discussing Eastenders and Coronation Street are boring.