Timeless Content

Depending on how much thought you have given it, you may have noticed a trend in the posts I make on this blog.  Almost all of the content I post is timeless.  By that I mean I could take the post and move the date it would be published around at will and it would still make sense.  I've mentioned before that I create posts and schedule them in advance, that is part of the reason why I don't write about current events.  The other reason however is because writing about current events requires a presence at those events or near their source to be able to write with detail and authority on those events.

Rolling news channels have a focus primarily on events that are happening right now in the world.  If you ever sit and watch one for more than a few minutes however you begin to see the reports be repeated.  The same information is presented in repetition and you realise how little information they actually possess about what is going on.  This I refer to simply as a lack of insight.  It's one of the reasons why I stopped relying on media outlets for information in the moment and choose to wait for stories to develop before reading about them.  It's also one of the reasons I watch Bloomberg for most of my news coverage.  If you don't have a background in finance or you can't follow economics then it will be a steep hill for you to climb if you are considering switching to it.  If you can climb that hill however it is worth it.

This post isn't sponsored, I wish it was, I've not been paid to write it, again I wish I was.  Bloomberg is an organization I would love to work for because it indulges part of me that I have shared on here - my love of digging deeper and analysing things to death.  Bloomberg as a news network revolves heavily around analysis, both from those with experience in their industries, and analysis provided by data.  If you spend even a few minutes watching it you will see charts presented on screen showing the trends and showing data.  There is a decided focus on what is already known, what conclusions can be drawn, and what projections can be made based on those conclusions.  This to me is a much more informative style of reporting, and for me personally I feel it carries greater insight.

I don't write many posts about developing stories, or things that are changing right now in the world.  There are a few exceptions as there always will be.  In those instances I tend to move whatever post was scheduled and write a new one to take its place.  I only do this however when I have something to say about how I think or feel in regards to the story.  I don't like speculative journalism because it posits theories about what might have happened or what might happen next based on nothing but opinion, yet most people who read it take it as fact, which in my view I regard as misinformation, providing information that is unintentionally false, and in some cases from some dubious news sources outright disinformation - information that is knowingly false but published anyway.

I know the term fake news has become synonymous with both of these, however the latter is the only one that can be considered fake, the former is simply inaccurate or poor quality.  The reason why it is rushed out in this way is simply down to exposure.  You gain the greatest exposure by riding trends.  You take that which is popular in the moment and you cater to it.  Whilst some people are able to catch a ride on this wave of populism and then safely dismount when it has taken them further, if you ride it to the end you will likely crash into the shore, and potentially be drowned in the process if a tsunami of public opinion follows it that you contravened in the first instance.  Dealing with this fluctuation in public opinion is one reason why I don't enter into those waters very often.  I prefer to focus on issues that are timeless because there is a greater willingness to consider the content and the message rather than heated emotions that burn in flames which others have already fanned until they have reached a blistering heat.

I could never pursue a career in politics, even if the majority of people were to see my opinion and agree with it, the attention and the voice of those who dissent is unfortunately the focus the media presents most.  If you believe this bubble that is created then you would believe every president and every prime minister is hated and that every country in the world is one argument away from civil war.  The reality is far from this depiction.  The majority as they say is silent.  The minority is vocal.  The systems of government we have centre around what the majority thinks however, not the minority.  Which is why you end up in situations where every news report tells you how hated a government is, and then come election time, they somehow manage to get elected again.  The reason is because the reporting you read and seen wasn't representative and the reason in turn for that deviation is simply because the reality is boring, the speculation is sensational.  News has become a form of entertainment, rather than a form of information and unlike the default conclusion many draw of blaming social media, I actually think the real reason this is the case is because of the birth of TV channels dedicated to news - something that happened many years before social media came along.

There's nothing wrong with the concept of a news channel, as long as there is a clarity, and a level of quality control.  These are decidedly lacking however for most news channels, instead of journalism they perpetuate "churnalism" the process of reporting that which has already been reported with slight variation.  One outlet picks up a story and covers it one way, another sees this and picks it up with a differing point of view, and another and another and so on, each time the view is changed slightly to the point where a mixture of claims emerge and eventually new reports emerge that took the amalgamation of those reports and produced a report of their own that whilst claiming to be factual actually gathered up all the points of speculation instead and produced a report that arguably is entirely fictional - whether they are aware of it or not.

I prefer to cover topics I find interesting, expressing my point of view, and sharing my experience.  This way I am the source, and the accuracy or inaccuracy is entirely down to my perception or misconception depending on whether my view actually matches up to reality - or, to put it more succinctly, this blog is not a source of news, that's why I don't write about things in the news right now.