Kevin Bemel ·
You’re Addicted Aren’t You? Here’s How to Break It
Not long after the tragedy in Paris, a friend asked me if I was going to blog about it. I answered no because naval officers should not comment publically on political matters. My reason may sound wimpy though even if military regulations allowed it, I would refrain.
Photo by Alan Cleaver (Unaltered)
One of my most politically outspoken friends adopted a similar policy a few years ago. He told me it was fruitless to argue politics since mostly it alienated people. I’ve found many people interpret a challenge to their political positions as an attack on their morality.
Here are several reasons for avoiding discussions of politics:
- It’s a waste of time. Have any of your discussions changed the positions of either political party?
- It’s a waste of time. Truthfully, how many people’s minds have you changed?
- It’s a waste of time. How long does it take you to calm down after a rancorous political debate?
- It’s counterproductive. How many friends and potential customers have you lost over political conflict?
- It’s counterproductive. How badly have you diminished your influence in other areas by people who discount you because of your political beliefs?
I have a handful of longstanding friends with whom I talk about politics. We agree on the necessity of comity so our discussions help us examine alternate viewpoints.
In the same vein, being caught up in the 24-hour news cycle is equally unproductive. The idea that people should constantly keep abreast of current events began with the advent of cable news in 1980. It’s a function of news needing to be a profit center for networks. But rarely do enough things happen to justify more than 15 to 30 minutes a day of news consumption.
Similarly fictional is the idea that news sources are unbiased. Many used to candidly disclose their partisanship. Although they may have changed since their founding, there’s no mystery about the original voice of the Press-Republican in Pittsburg or the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. And while Colorado’s Delta County Independent would seem to be unbiased, more likely it laid a pox on both major parties’ houses.
To be sure, journalists are schooled in objectivity. But they are still human beings. I’ve found people who agree with a news source’s voice think it’s nonpartisan while those who disagree claim it’s biased. Who’s correct?
How is it that during World War II, by any definition a more tumultuous time than now, people survived reading a daily newspaper and perhaps a special edition when some momentous event justified a special press run?
If you cannot quit news consumption completely, I recommend you limit yourself to no more than 30 minutes per day. As a naval officer, I have access to the Chief of Naval Information’s News Clips, also known as the Early Bird, which aggregates relevant stories from many sources. I can skim headlines and read articles of interest in about 15 minutes. You can create something similar with Feedly or another RSS aggregator.
With life overburdened by too many responsibilities, even an extra 10 or 15 minutes per day can be put to better use. Relaxation between projects, a short walk, or a call or text to your spouse or child are of much greater benefit to you, your colleagues and loved one than getting the latest minutiae passing for news or rehashing political arguments to no avail.
Replace both addictions with a productive habit in line with your personal mission statement and goals.
What downside is there to abstaining from politics and news?
You can leave a comment on this question or ask another question below ↓
