191
Is everything the worst?
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
191 points (93.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43982 readers
750 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Do you know how much better we would all be doing as a country if we had no access to "news"?
I'm sixty-two and I think one reason we feel so anxious and depressed all the time is because we have more information than we have ability to act.
Think of the myriad threats there are to the earth and humanity. If we ALL undertook to fix them together, there's still the question of priority. We can't do everything at once.
And most global problems require a unanimous response. Like the United Nations, if one country votes NO, you can't make progress. So unless we plan on a global war over climate, or plastics, or AI, or humanitarian treatment of humans, it's going nowhere.
We have elected officials who CAN effect the change that's needed. They are trained. They have inside information that we don't. They have access to technologies and resources we don't. We absolutely have to make the best choices for our elected leaders that we can, and then trust them to do the right thing. But, after that, we can't continue to let it eat us up.
I'm with Dory on this one. Just keep swimming, swimming, swimming.
I disagree. Back in maybe the 60s the public broadcast networks were not fully beholden to investors, did not have competition from the internet, and didn't have to do 24 hours of news. As a result, they had time to do responsible reporting. The current power structure encourages news media to do whatever it takes to grab your attention and hold it, and the best way to do that is fear.
I have not fully cut out the news from my life. There are some channels on YouTube that do good reporting like Sir Swag and of course Phillip DeFranco.
Another thing to point out is that, assuming you are American, we are in an election year. News companies really ramp up the fear mongering on election years.
What part are you disagreeing with? We sound the same, kinda, to me.
I don't think the amount of information is the problem, just the way it is presented to us.
IMHO, my mental health improved significantly after substituting Lemmy for Reddit and Mastodon for facebook/insta/etc. Or maybe I've just gotten better at being unattached to digital life and social pressure
Well, I'll say this much.
You certainly know how to gling.
Thats a reference to a relatively famous linguistics study lol. A bunch of children were given questions such as "This is a man who knows how to gling. He is glinging. He did the same thing yesterday. Yesterday he _____." or presenting them with a wug and then asking what the plural of wug is. The children had very consistent answers to these nonsense grammar questions, showing that grammar rules are mainly learned through experience instead of being memorized for each word.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
relatively famous linguistics study
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Huh! I might have guessed that, but it's always good to get a study to back up things.
So, "I have glinged", or "I have glung?"
Glang was common, but so was glinged.