I didn't read your question but "yes"
Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
But actually, I don't for political stuff because it is so freaking depressing, and you can't affect it much.
I love reading science articles though!
If I find the headline interesting, I might read the article if I have enough time.
Before I comment on things, I do at the very least skim them to confirm that I'm commenting on what the article actually says, not just the headline.
yup, I have a lot of time so I read a lot.
If you don't have a lot of time, don't sweat it.
Worked for a newspaper for many years. This is a great question.
Good headlines are both intended to give reasonable summaries and drive readers toward articles they'd like to read, because newspapers -- and news media congregation systems in general -- don't have a true table of contents, only a series of categories under which article types live. Headlines, at a glance, function as a table of contents in newsprint formats because of this: you can scan for what you find interesting, but don't have to intake the whole newspaper page to understand what's being reported.
App scrolling through headlines, then, is functionally the same thing. Just a different UX, is all.
What I find really worrying though is the trend to pick headlines that don't summarize, but sensationalize and twist the content. And that's not just a tabloid problem.
I know that this is designed to generate more clicks, but since most people skip most of the content, only the headlines stick. And if these are wrong, misinformation will stick.
I read just the headline
Sometimes. I'll often read the comments to get the highlights, but I'll also read the article if it interests me or when I need to know more details.
And let's be honest: 90% of news articles don't contain more relevant information for me than the headline.
"Politician said X" has almost never any effect on my life.
I just scrolled through the front page of Der Spiegel. The first 10 articles are speculations about campaign decisions, analyses of things already known, and opinion pieces of some mildly knowledgeable people.
Yeah, that's mostly irrelevant. Yes, some background would be nice, but I don't have time to read about everything that isn't of consequence for me anyway.
Both
If the headline sounds interesting I'll read the article.
If I'm going to comment then I read. Always seeing mfs asking questions answered in the article or raging about shit they imagined based on the headline alone. It's embarrassing
(👉👈)
Or maybe people don't want to click tracking link
OR
they want to seed a discussion on fedi ;)
If it's a unique event then I read the article. If it's just something like a cabinet pick, a nation's response to another nation's actions etc. I just rely on the headline.
My subscription feed is very small, selective. Then I read about a 25% of these articles, and another 25% I think the headline tells me all.
If it is youtube links instead of articles, I click on only 1% of them. Most are just a huge waste of time even when their topic is interesting. People who post youtube links without writing a personal summary should get stabbed in their asses on both sides, so they can't sit for four weeks :-)
I'm around 50:50, I read a lot of them but am prone to cynical hot takes on occasion. I'm particularly interested in social community and feeling like I'm at least present with others. Physical disability and in my case, the social isolation it causes–sucks. I'm here when I'm not able to do much else and need to escape. So that is my excuse for the times I'm not reading and the overly cynical hot takes.
In the off chance I do try to read the article, the ridiculous amount ads and popups remind me why I just read headlines.
uBlock Origin, my friend. Works on Firefox on any computer os and Android Firefox. If iPhone, theres Brave.
And pihole.
If it seems interesting I'll skim through it.
If you're seeing a lot of material you don't want to see, for whatever reason, you should look at which communities it keeps appearing in and unjoin those communities. Even if they would otherwise be of interest, they are doing you harm right now. You can always rejoin later.
That depends both on the particular topic and whether it's paywalled or not. If it is paywalled, a summary will usually suffice, plus I can get a better gist of it from some of the more serious comments in the thread.
Most of the time just the headline. If it's obviously opinion I'll often skip. If the headline is a question I'll usually skip. If it's an obviously horrific story I'll skip. If it's something that is relevant or useful I'll read. You are what you eat. That applies to your eyes and ears as well as your mouth
Lol the hurricane is literally heading your direction.
Nope no hurricane, I'm gonna cover my eyes and ears. I didn't see anything. Just let me die in peace. Noooooo!
Depends on the article.
If it's something I have a genuine interest in, then heck yeah, I read the article. I like me some long-form discussion, so if it's a high quality article then I need to read it in order to make a high quality comment.
If it's about politics it requires more nuance. I'm not going to stay quiet about things that do have the potential to affect me, the people I care about, and humans in general. I'm also not going to go out of my way to consume a ton of propaganda. That's when the pithy jokes come in, usually with a goal of calling out misinformation or general assholery.
By and large, the vast majority of headlines are bait. You're not going to get a clear picture of what's going on from a loaded title anyway, and it's alarming how often people make the opposite inference from the headline compared to the body of the article. I suppose it's human nature to look for easy answers, but if you only look at the summary then you're allowing other people to form your opinion for you. Those people always have an agenda.
In this political climate, the news is probably going to make the average reader angry. If it does that means it's working - either because they're consuming hateful propaganda or because they're being agitated against the evils of the establishment. This is by design: you can garner more clicks from angry, frightened people, and they're usually easier to control that way.
I agree that you can't take on the burdens of the world as an individual. But ignoring problems that have no will to resolve themselves only allows those issues to perpetuate themselves. Something about evil succeeding when good people do nothing.
I do basic research, and vote, and then basically ignore the news and wash the sins off of me. I aint responsible for how everyone else voted. I voted, I did my part. If evil wins, that wasn't my fault.
Now I can skim headlines and make jokes in the comments while I wait to see what happens in the future.
I agree that it's healthy to be able to disconnect from the news.
I also think that current events are going to get real bad, real fast, real soon. Then again I'm part of a minority that has some of the most vile rhetoric thrown at them, so that probably colours my opinion a smidge.
I hope you get to vote in the next cycle. I also hope that everyone starts doing something for their community beyond showing up to vote once every four years. The world's not going to change for the better otherwise.
Yes, usually, but I'm more frequently using the Read Aloud extension. It's the least effort that gets me there.
I just read wikipedia's portal of current events for world news. The whole articles.
Newspapers I don't read, and i block news articles on social media.
Hmm I don't really know if relying on wikipedia is a good idea. Seems like more prone to false info than the news. I'd rather just have no info than potentially false info that makes me biased.
Seems like more prone to false info than the news.
How so?
I don't click most links due to online tracking although fedi crowd is pretty good about cleaning up tracking links.
Either way, most media is owner class asset used to shill their interest. So reading that shit aint nothing but reading some rich old clowns opinion on the issue.
Comment section is where real discussion happens anyway.
I drop my 2 cents to see how it resonates and what counter points I can gather. Most of the time it is people screeching some owner sanctioned bullshit...
so much bootlicking or tankies...
I don't click most links due to online tracking
I installed URLCheck from F-Droid on my android phone and tablet. It lets me review the link before it opens, tells me what each parameter does, and lets me remove specific/all parameters so I can just go to the direct link. No more trackers in links!