News is bad for you – and giving up reading it will make you happier
News is bad for your health. It leads to fear and aggression, and hinders your creativity and
ability to think deeply. The solution? Stop consuming it altogether.
In the past few decades, the fortunate among us have recognised the hazards of living with an
overabundance of food (obesity, diabetes) and have started to change our diets. But most of us do
not yet understand that news is to the mind what sugar is to the body. News is easy to
digest. The media feeds us small bites of trivial matter, tidbits that don't really concern
our lives and don't require thinking. That's why we experience almost no saturation. Unlike
reading books and long magazine articles (which require thinking we can swallow limitless
quantities of news flashes, which are bright-coloured candies for the mind. Today, we have reached
the same point in relation to information that we faced 20 years ago in regard to food. We are
beginning to recognise how toxic news can be.
Take the following event (borrowed from Nassim Taleb). A car drives over a bridge, and the bridge
collapses. What does the news media focus on? The car. The person in the car. Where he came
from. Where he planned to go. How he experienced the crash (if he survived). But that is all
irrelevant. What's relevant? The structural stability of the bridge. That's the underlying risk that
has been lurking, and could lurk in other bridges. But the car is flashy, it's dramatic, it's a
person (non-abstract and it's news that's cheap to produce. News leads us to walk around with the
completely wrong risk map in our heads. So terrorism is over-rated. Chronic stress is
under-rated. The collapse of Lehman Brothers is overrated. Fiscal irresponsibility is
under-rated. Astronauts are over-rated. Nurses are under-rated.
We are not rational enough to be exposed to the press. Watching an airplane crash on television
is going to change your attitude toward that risk, regardless of its real probability. If you
think you can compensate with the strength of your own inner contemplation, you are wrong. Bankers
and economists – who have powerful incentives to compensate for news-borne hazards – have shown that
they cannot. The only solution: cut yourself off from news consumption entirely.
News is irrelevant.
Out of the approximately 10,000 news stories you have read in the last 12 months, name one that –
because you consumed it – allowed you to make a better decision about a serious matter affecting
your life, your career or your business. The point is: the consumption of news is irrelevant to
you. But people find it very difficult to recognise what's relevant. It's much easier to recognise
what's new. The relevant versus the new is the fundamental battle of the current age. Media
organisations want you to believe that news offers you some sort of a competitive advantage. Many
fall for that. We get anxious when we're cut off from the flow of news. In reality, news consumption
is a competitive disadvantage. The less news you consume, the bigger the advantage you have.
News has no explanatory power.
News items are bubbles popping on the surface of a deeper world. Will accumulating facts help you
understand the world? Sadly, no. The relationship is inverted. The important stories are
non-stories: slow, powerful movements that develop below journalists' radar but have a transforming
effect. The more "news factoids" you digest, the less of the big picture you will understand. If
more information leads to higher economic success, we'd expect journalists to be at the top of the
pyramid. That's not the case.
News is toxic to your body.
It constantly triggers the limbic system. Panicky stories spur the release of cascades of
glucocorticoid (cortisol). This deregulates your immune system and inhibits the release of growth
hormones. In other words, your body finds itself in a state of chronic stress. High glucocorticoid
levels cause impaired digestion, lack of growth (cell, hair, bone nervousness and susceptibility
to infections. The other potential side-effects include fear, aggression, tunnel-vision and
News increases cognitive errors.
News feeds the mother of all cognitive errors: confirmation bias. In the words of Warren Buffett:
"What the human being is best at doing is interpreting all new information so that their prior
conclusions remain intact." News exacerbates this flaw. We become prone to overconfidence, take
stupid risks and misjudge opportunities. It also exacerbates another cognitive error: the story
bias. Our brains crave stories that "make sense" – even if they don't correspond to reality. Any
journalist who writes, "The market moved because of X" or "the company went bankrupt because of Y"
is an idiot. I am fed up with this cheap way of "explaining" the world.
News inhibits thinking.
Thinking requires concentration. Concentration requires uninterrupted time. News pieces are
specifically engineered to interrupt you. They are like viruses that steal attention for their own
purposes. News makes us shallow thinkers. But it's worse than that. News severely affects
memory. There are two types of memory. Long-range memory's capacity is nearly infinite, but working
memory is limited to a certain amount of slippery data. The path from short-term to long-term memory
is a choke-point in the brain, but anything you want to understand must pass through it. If this
passageway is disrupted, nothing gets through. Because news disrupts concentration, it weakens
comprehension. Online news has an even worse impact. In a 2001 study two scholars in Canada showed
that comprehension declines as the number of hyperlinks in a document increases. Why? Because
whenever a link appears, your brain has to at least make the choice not to click, which in itself is
distracting. News is an intentional interruption system.
News works like a drug.
As stories develop, we want to know how they continue. With hundreds of arbitrary storylines in our
heads, this craving is increasingly compelling and hard to ignore. Scientists used to think that the
dense connections formed among the 100 billion neurons inside our skulls were largely fixed by the
time we reached adulthood. Today we know that this is not the case. Nerve cells routinely break old
connections and form new ones. The more news we consume, the more we exercise the neural circuits
devoted to skimming and multitasking while ignoring those used for reading deeply and thinking with
profound focus. Most news consumers – even if they used to be avid book readers – have lost the
ability to absorb lengthy articles or books. After four, five pages they get tired, their
concentration vanishes, they become restless. It's not because they got older or their schedules
became more onerous. It's because the physical structure of their brains has changed.
News wastes time.
If you read the newspaper for 15 minutes each morning, then check the news for 15 minutes during
lunch and 15 minutes before you go to bed, then add five minutes here and there when you're at work,
then count distraction and refocusing time, you will lose at least half a day every
week. Information is no longer a scarce commodity. But attention is. You are not that irresponsible
with your money, reputation or health. Why give away your mind?
News makes us passive.
News stories are overwhelmingly about things you cannot influence. The daily repetition of
news about things we can't act upon makes us passive. It grinds us down until we adopt a worldview
that is pessimistic, desensitised, sarcastic and fatalistic. The scientific term is "learned
helplessness". It's a bit of a stretch, but I would not be surprised if news consumption, at least
partially contributes to the widespread disease of depression.
News kills creativity.
Finally, things we already know limit our creativity. This is one reason that mathematicians,
novelists, composers and entrepreneurs often produce their most creative works at a young age. Their
brains enjoy a wide, uninhabited space that emboldens them to come up with and pursue novel ideas. I
don't know a single truly creative mind who is a news junkie – not a writer, not a composer,
mathematician, physician, scientist, musician, designer, architect or painter. On the other hand, I
know a bunch of viciously uncreative minds who consume news like drugs. If you want to come up with
old solutions, read news. If you are looking for new solutions, don't.
Society needs journalism – but in a different way. Investigative journalism is always relevant. We
need reporting that polices our institutions and uncovers truth. But important findings don't have
to arrive in the form of news. Long journal articles and in-depth books are good, too.
I have now gone without news for four years, so I can see, feel and report the effects of this
freedom first-hand: less disruption, less anxiety, deeper thinking, more time, more insights. It's
not easy, but it's worth it.
The depth of our intelligence hinges on our ability to transfer information from working memory, the
scratch pad of consciousness, to long-term memory, the mind's filing system. When facts and
experiences enter our long-term memory, we are able to weave them into the complex ideas that give
richness to our thought. But the passage from working memory to long-term memory also forms a
bottleneck in our brain. Whereas long-term memory has an almost unlimited capacity, working memory
can hold only a relatively small amount of information at a time. And that short-term storage is
fragile: A break in our attention can sweep its contents from our mind.
Imagine filling a bathtub with a thimble; that's the challenge involved in moving information from
working memory into long-term memory. When we read a book, the information faucet provides a steady
drip, which we can control by varying the pace of our reading. Through our single-minded
concentration on the text, we can transfer much of the information, thimbleful by thimbleful, into
long-term memory and forge the rich associations essential to the creation of knowledge and wisdom.
On the Net, we face many information faucets, all going full blast. Our little thimble overflows as
we rush from tap to tap. We transfer only a small jumble of drops from different faucets, not a
continuous, coherent stream.
Psychologists refer to the information flowing into our working memory as our cognitive load. When
the load exceeds our mind's ability to process and store it, we are unable to retain the information
or to draw connections with other memories. We can't translate the new material into conceptual
knowledge. Our ability to learn suffers, and our understanding remains weak.