I'm trying to manage my time better, allocating sessions to read news every day. 2 sessions (after lunch and evening) seem optimal to me but it's maybe too much.
How do you organise yourself ?
I guess it depends what you're trying to achieve, why you read the news, and what else you could be doing instead.
Arguably you could subscribe to something that gives you a competently summarised payload of news at low frequency (monthly?), and spend one long session once a month digesting that.
It's a brilliant question -- the optimum daily news diet. I find listening to NPR in the morning is a solid minimum dosage of daily headline news. Supplemented later by Bloomberg, Fark, HN, Drudge, etc...
I read the news with a cup of tea mid-morning, for about as long as the tea lasts.
Probably just as important is what you read, I tend to read the business press because there isn't so much bias and sensationalism as the general media.
When I click the Windows 8 button at work the news app shows a headline blurb. If it's interesting (and preferably world news) I click it, and see what else is there too.
Otherwise I let the more interesting news bubble up via social media discussions or chatting with people.
I used to be more on top of it, but it really didn't do me a whole lot of good, other than provide me with an extra bullet point or two to bring up with amateur pundits for them to dismiss and bring up a new subject about some little thing they were told to be outraged about today.
I can't say I feel like I'm missing out on too much.
Now I just don't bother and keep up with the important news: board games (via Reddit), tech news (via HN), and video games (via Kotaku).
7 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 25.1 ms ] threadArguably you could subscribe to something that gives you a competently summarised payload of news at low frequency (monthly?), and spend one long session once a month digesting that.
The way one processes news cycles- is very much determined by your personal rhythm and energy levels. Here's an interesting take on the optimal time for everything from the WSJ > http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100008723963904441800045780182...
Probably just as important is what you read, I tend to read the business press because there isn't so much bias and sensationalism as the general media.
Otherwise I let the more interesting news bubble up via social media discussions or chatting with people.
I used to be more on top of it, but it really didn't do me a whole lot of good, other than provide me with an extra bullet point or two to bring up with amateur pundits for them to dismiss and bring up a new subject about some little thing they were told to be outraged about today.
I can't say I feel like I'm missing out on too much.
Now I just don't bother and keep up with the important news: board games (via Reddit), tech news (via HN), and video games (via Kotaku).