I wrote a couple of weeks ago about giving up social media (sans LinkedIn) for Lent. Honestly, it’s been great and the initial FOMO wears off about two weeks into the fast.

Though, without social media, how am I going about keeping up with what is going on in the world? Sure, social media can be a brain drain but sticking your head in the sand (metaphorically) can’t be a healthier alternative.

I have found a hack for staying on top of current events without the aid of Twitter or Facebook.

Ready?

I read the news.

I honestly feel more informed

Not being inundated with the news as soon as it breaks didn’t make me less informed. It’s probably making me more informed. How is that possible?

First - I’m reading articles from my own point of view and without someone’s opinion before the click. I didn’t open up the link because someone had a hot take about it in a tweet. I’m just reading an article because it’s either a topic I’m interested in learning more about or feel like I should be more informed on.

I’m also taking in information at a slower rate. Breaking news on social media is algorithmically incentivized for the first person to say it, rather than being totally accurate or providing the right context. Reading articles after stories have had a few hours to be vetted and investigated a little more thoroughly (I believe) provides me slightly more accurate information.

I can read an article, take in the information and make my own judgements on the content of the piece without social bias, and move on. I’ve learned something new without tipping any apple carts with my own hot take.

According to research from Pew, I may actually be more informed

A good many of us primarily get our news through social media. Honestly, I am usually one of those people as much as I don’t like to admit it.

Many like to complain about media bias (which is real) but when you’re getting filtered content shared with you through another bias, it’s not any better.

Research from Pew last year in the height of COVID and election season indicated that those who primarily did their news gathering via social media were actually some of the least informed on political topics. The graph below breaks all of this down.

My incentive for reading has (sadly) changed

My thinking on this will eventually be its own blog post. What I have found is that I’m reading now to be more informed and potentially shape my thinking on the world. The fact that I am reading with the goal of pure information gathering and not “what should I read that would be good to share on social?” or “how can I share this in a way that appropriately shows where I lean on a particular issue” changes both what I read and how I read it.

Mainly, I’m doing a better job actually reading than skimming at the end of the day. I’m digesting information on my own time and not in such a way that I need to share within a certain window to maintain relevancy (which sounds ridiculous as I type that but it’s somewhat true).

Paying For My News

In the last year, mainly inspired from an episode of Patriot Act, I started becoming an active paying subscriber to a lot of news publications. I know my small monthly payment to the AJC isn’t going to be the pillar that saves journalism…but only reading the free articles with click-baity articles seen on social helps even less. Paying for content is a free market way approach to help maintain a free press.

I’ve even become a paying subscriber to a few publications on Substack. I think the whole model provides a really interesting opportunity for content creators to connect directly with their audience and cut out the middle man on getting paid.

I’ll do a deeper dive on what publications I subscribe to in a future post.

After Easter?

I probably will go back on social - but put time limits on how I engage. I want to rely less on doomscrolling to be an informed citizen. I’m less stressed and more informed with this new habit. Why go back to something worse?