Adam Keys is Thinking

At the height of the DeLay/Rove movement, I became very disenchanted with news and politics. The propaganda, the lack of reason and the generally grim outlook were causing me too much stress. So, I stopped following news. This was good for my well-being, but I felt a little guilty about not understanding what was going on.

Fast forward a few years; the economy is booming and the paint is starting to peel on the Rove master plan. I’m taking light rail to work every day, so I have some quality time for reading on my hands. I don’t remember where I got the hunch, but I went ahead and subscribed to The Economist to read on the train.

I originally let my subscription lapse, as I found it difficult to keep up with the magazine on a weekly basis. However, as the mortgage crisis peaked, I resubscribed. I’ve found it extremely useful in trying to understand what exactly is going on, how it compares to previous downturns and as the basis for a bozo filter.

Regarding my earlier discoveries that everyone has an axe to grind and that the news cycle is often too short, The Economist is well aligned. Their axe to grind is the superiority of free markets and democratic societies. They publish weekly and cover a gamut of topics that forces them to only put ink to topics that are actually meaningful.

In summary: The Economist is a great source of news if you are wary of news sources and I heart it. It’s a fantastic place to start understanding the non-sciences that describe our world.

I first started trying to figure out the world, and especially politics, after September 11th. Before that, it was a topic of tangential concern. Afterwards, of course, it seemed critically important. My roommate at the time was a rather strong adherent to Fox News. I started reading weblogs that were pretty much the polar opposite in opinion. Somewhere in the middle, I frequently watched The Daily Show. I say they’re in the middle because, roughly speaking, they are not left or right wing but anti-idiot.

I quickly discovered two things.

First, everyone has an axe to grind. Trying to figure out that person’s axe is an unfortunate necessity to understanding whether they are a good source of news and opinion.

Second, twenty-four hour news and dozens of weblog posts a day are just too twitchy. To support that rate of production, you have to make a big deal about lots of things that are really no big deal at all. A daily news cycle is better but still intolerable. One week is the shortest term over which you can stand back and start to decide which events are meaningful.

Long-story short: I recognize Fox News as propaganda, dismiss CNN and MSNBC as too twitchy, realize that weblogs are too spazzy and that, in general, people are colored by their opinions and vetting them is not interesting to me.