<mod note> Probabky a good idea if we avoid getting naming specific soirces. This discussion isn’t about which source is preferable or reliable.
That is totally legit. You folks are fine filters. Love ya!I get most of my news from these forums.![]()
A new one for me! Coined by Michael Crichton no less.Ah yes, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. Had to look up the name again.
Basically it is when you see a news story on a topic that you are expert in and realize that the reporter is clueless. The rational conclusion is that is likely the case for most news stories. The amnesia effect is turning the page and believing what you read on other topics.
The Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is the tendency for people to trust news media on unfamiliar topics, despite recognizing that the same media outlets produce inaccurate or superficial reports on subjects they know well. Coined by author Michael Crichton in 2002 to describe this cognitive dissonance, the term suggests that individuals "forget" the unreliability of a source when turning the page.
- Origin: Named by Michael Crichton, referencing Nobel Prize-winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann, who experienced this phenomenon frequently.
I’ve experienced a similar experience with expert reviews (Consumer Report, Wirecutter) on things I know more a bit more than the average person. I didn’t know this had a name, but thanks for enlightening us.Ah yes, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. Had to look up the name again.
Basically it is when you see a news story on a topic that you are expert in and realize that the reporter is clueless. The rational conclusion is that is likely the case for most news stories. The amnesia effect is turning the page and believing what you read on other topics.
Tbh crazy as it is to sayGlad that day hasn't happened for you. Hope it doesn't for any of us. But for some it has already. For others it certainly will.
And of course, not trying get you to change anything.
That's a cool approach I think. UniqueOne thing I'm finding is that if I seek out experts on topics which interest me, they usually report on "news" that affects their field. And they generally have a much less sensationalist, and more nuanced, take on the story.
I can go almost completely news-free this way. Say I check a financial site to see how my 401k is doing. If the politicians did something stupid (or good) economically, it will be reflected there. Everything I know about the Strait of Hormuz conflict comes from a shipping channel I follow. The list goes on.
The trick is not to get sucked into AI Slop. Pick any interesting topic, and there are 1,000 YouTube videos of AI-generated voice reading AI-generated scripts behind AI-generated graphics. Learn to recognize and avoid them. Find names of real people you can trust, and watch their actual channel, not a fake. Read text sources you trust.
Same here. Awful news orgsInteresting comment. I also was involved first hand with a news event and saw how it was reported later. Opened my eyes as well.
Let's be real, everyone gets their news from doom scrolling all day.
I haven't paid for cable for a couple years now. Everything is online now, on every platform...whether you want to see it or not.
I lived in Tucson for 30 years.I watch the local Tucson news and weather most early mornings for about ten minutes (until I get the weather) but haven’t watched tv national news for decades. I do scan a couple of online newspapers over breakfast.
After spending large amounts of time with my late mother watching cable TV news during her several years of being housebound, I haven't been able to do it at all since.I haven’t watched a full news broadcast since 9/11. Haven’t missed it even a little.
Why does that seem to be the norm? Days at my in-laws meant a TV turned up loud to a news channel…all day.After spending large amounts of time with my late mother watching cable TV news during her several years of being housebound, I haven't been able to do it at all since.
I don't get it, but perhaps it gives them a feeling of still being engaged with the world when they can't be otherwise.Why does that seem to be the norm? Days at my in-laws meant a TV turned up loud to a news channel…all day.
I just spent a few days with my oldest sister and she has now developed the habit too.
There has got to be something behind it.
What really improved my mental health is when I quit Facebook, Twitter and other social media
Yeah, I have had several opportunities to determine that the news is about "product" not truth. Some of these opportunities were as someone mentioned "Personal" (in my case, with a microphone stuck in my face and someone asking "How do you feel about so-and-so-and-such-and-such-who-is-doing-thus-and-so?").Ah yes, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. Had to look up the name again.
Basically it is when you see a news story on a topic that you are expert in and realize that the reporter is clueless. The rational conclusion is that is likely the case for most news stories. The amnesia effect is turning the page and believing what you read on other topics.
I admire your "cool." My BS detector is pretty good and it bothers me that it seems to go off on most "stories." Bias bothers me more than simple inaccuracy.I watch outlets from different perspectives and make a point of identifying bias and misleading narratives.
It doesn't bother me or change my mood.
Good point.I watch outlets from different perspectives and make a point of identifying bias and misleading narratives.
It doesn't bother me or change my mood.