[openknot]

Depends on the news source. There is a noticeable difference between Tweets and unverified Facebook posts, news media from Buzzfeed or Salon, articles from a local newspaper, articles from The New York Times/Washington Post, and articles from the Financial Times or The Wall Street Journal.

Not all news is designed for outrage. Several publications publish in-depth articles in a neutral way, where you can actually learn something. Investigations are also often genuinely useful for a better society. Zuckerberg's position therefore doesn't hold true for all news media.

Separately, depending on how your social media feed is set up, you can be feel jealous/lesser due to seeing the high points of the lives of people you know (depending on your personality type), seeing news on your feed, or seeing neither due to subscribing to accounts in niche fields.

[greggman3]

And you could say the same about social media. I'm on facebook. I get no outrage. I unfollowed anyone who posts it and FB doesn't insert any. As an example right now my FB feed is:

> Picture of a the blood moon eclipse a friend took

> A Picture of a CD cover of a song a friend is listing too

> Pictures from my sister visiting her best friend in another state.

> A funny gif from a friend making fun of crypto crashing

> A poster of the new Japanese Ultraman movie and a friend saying he saw it and really enjoyed it and is looking forward to the Masked Rider movie.

> More pictures from my sister

> A collection of doodles from an artist friend

> A picture of my sister with 2 x-neighbors I haven't seen in 35 years

> A friend saying he loved the video game "The Final Station"

> More pics from my sister

> A friend posting a link to a music video she loves

> A friend posting about a game they made at a game jam

> A friend saying he started doing trip planning for families going to Disneyland.

> My aunt posting a picture of flowers my uncle bought her.

> A friend posting about a show he went to in Argentina

> My sister posting a words of wisdom type picture

> A friend posting he can't believe he's had the same job he loves for 8yrs already

> A friend posting an artist concept drawing of Cassini taking a picture of Saturn

> A friend who makes one off dresses on etsy posting her latest creations

> A friend posting he likes "Picard" but it should have had a "Shut up, Wesley" scene.

No outrage in my feed.

To put it another way, social media is what you make of it. If you don't want the outrage the stop following the outrage.

[Cthulhu_]

I've stopped going to facebook myself because even though a lot of it for me was like that (and no outrage or politics, that's just outrage and edge cases that filter onto aggregators like reddit), I noticed at some point that a third was Facebook ads, and another third ads made by other people.

I'm latching onto your post because a number of those are advertisements / promotions; social media has turned a lot of people into unpaid marketeers. In a sense, I mean I get that people are fans of e.g. TV shows, but still. Anyway here's some that I think are advertisements in disguise:

> A Picture of a CD cover of a song a friend is listing too

> A poster of the new Japanese Ultraman movie and a friend saying he saw it and really enjoyed it and is looking forward to the Masked Rider movie.

> A friend saying he loved the video game "The Final Station"

> A friend posting a link to a music video she loves

> A friend posting about a game they made at a game jam

> A friend saying he started doing trip planning for families going to Disneyland.

> My aunt posting a picture of flowers my uncle bought her.

> A friend posting about a show he went to in Argentina

> A friend who makes one off dresses on etsy posting her latest creations

> A friend posting he likes "Picard" but it should have had a "Shut up, Wesley" scene.

[tayo42]

This kind of reads like an ad for Facebook. It sounds way to ideal. My feed is just reposted meme pages with the occasional baby and vacation picture thrown in

[hackernewds]

That does not seem controversial. However Facebook/Instagram does not allow you to only see results for friends you follow. Explore page, ads, recommended posts, shorts, reels pepper your news feed. And your friends posts are also sorted with the intention of maximum engagement, not relevance.

[sghiassy]

Correct. I believe you.

But somehow that’s not what happening to the population as a whole.

My guess, is the mere fact you’re on HN means you’re separate from the population writ large

[Hamuko]

>Not all news is designed for outrage.

I don't think I get anxiety from content "designed for outrage". But if I go to the front page of the Washington Post, here's what I see:

>Buffalo shooting suspect wrote of plans months ago, online messages show

>Only 22 saw the Buffalo shooting live. Millions have seen it since.

>A barrage of ‘never-ending gunshots’: Inside the Buffalo massacre

>Ukraine ends bloody battle for Mariupol, evacuates fighters in steel plant

>Republicans are bringing extremism to the mainstream

>White Americans must speak out against white supremacy

>Russia is losing. That might make Putin more dangerous.

I'd say that these headlines are more in the "giving me anxiety" camp than not.

[greggman3]

To add to this. I don't watch the news anymore (maybe that makes me a bad person). I also rarely read it (except for hacker "news") but... Every few weeks I visit my mom for a few days and she wants to watch the news around 10pm. It always massively over hyped violence, crime, political outrage, and it's funny, in a sad way, that she always gets upset at it and ask her why she keeps watching. She says "for the weather" to which I reply (you can ask your ipad/iphone) but she keeps doing it even though every night it's clearly upsetting her. I think it's a habit like she feels they day isn't over unless she ends the night with news, even though it's 90% designed for outrage and sensationalism.

[openknot]

That is the point of my comment: not all news sources are designed for clickbait. In contrast, consider The Financial Times's (FT's) headlines:

>Tiger Global slashes bets on tech groups after stock market sell-off

> News in-depth. Military briefing: why Russia and Ukraine are fighting over a Black Sea outcrop

> Investors pull $7bn from Tether as stablecoin jitters intensify

> Buffett buys $3bn Citi stake in value-hunting stock splurge

> Ethiopia atrocities cast long shadow as city of Lalibela prays for peace

> Qantas says synthetic fuel could power long flights by mid-2030s

Some of the news itself is tragic. But it's a false equivalence to claim that the headlines and article content between news sources (e.g. Washington Post vs. the FT) are equally outrage-provoking or informative. The Washington Post was listed in the middle because their articles are usually highly informative (from the number of interviewed people and documents analyzed), though their headlines are more clickbait.

Both The Washington Post or the FT are different from (typically) Salon, and each is a far cry from social media. Also, the debate of news media in place of discussing social media is exactly the effect that Zuckerberg intended with his comment.

[davidhay]

Exactly. Also, Major news outlets A/B test their headlines, just like advertisers, which has clearly show that anxiety provoking headlines get clicks.

[em500]

Maybe try FT. Currently the Most Read headlines are:

- Bitcoin has no future as a payments network, says FTX chief

- Putin signals acceptance of Finland and Sweden joining Nato

- China’s economic activity plummets as Covid lockdowns hit growth

- "Russia learns a hard lesson about the folly of war"

- Harrow Beijing school loses its hallowed British branding

Or Wikipedia's Current events Portal:

- Hassan Sheikh Mohamud (pictured) is elected as President of Somalia.

- In the United States, ten people are killed in a mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.

- Ukraine, represented by Kalush Orchestra with the song "Stefania", wins the Eurovision Song Contest.

- Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan inherits the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and becomes President of the United Arab Emirates after the death of Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

[rilezg]

I don't agree that it depends on the news source. The problem is consuming media and not acting on it. A person can use social media to inspire real positive change in their behaviors and their life, and a person can read in-depth, well-written articles about atrocities happening half-way around the world and just end up feeling powerless and depressed.

[openknot]

There are legitimate opportunities to act on the news. For example, I avoided a fairly convincing phishing attempt with my work email due to reading a relevant article in a mainstream newspaper. News can similarly help a person avoid scams and cons.

News also provides common conversational topics with different types of people. A lot of people in business read The Wall Street Journal, and it’s easier to find common talking points with them if I read the news (especially on news about their industry). Similarly, a lot of academics and people in education read The New York Times. Though reading the news isn’t necessary to start a conversation, it’s often an easy starting point.