I’ll be honest, I don’t even want to read articles anymore. Its just crazy cabinet nominees every time. Wars happening. Nothing I can control. I just post something sarcastic or jokes in the comments. The only thing I care is if a hurricane is headed in my direction.

Y’all actually read all this shit? How does anyone have the energy?

    • frank@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      But actually, I don’t for political stuff because it is so freaking depressing, and you can’t affect it much.

      I love reading science articles though!

  • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 hour ago

    If I find the headline interesting, I might read the article if I have enough time.

    Before I comment on things, I do at the very least skim them to confirm that I’m commenting on what the article actually says, not just the headline.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    22 minutes ago

    yup, I have a lot of time so I read a lot.

    If you don’t have a lot of time, don’t sweat it.

  • chirospasm@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Worked for a newspaper for many years. This is a great question.

    Good headlines are both intended to give reasonable summaries and drive readers toward articles they’d like to read, because newspapers – and news media congregation systems in general – don’t have a true table of contents, only a series of categories under which article types live. Headlines, at a glance, function as a table of contents in newsprint formats because of this: you can scan for what you find interesting, but don’t have to intake the whole newspaper page to understand what’s being reported.

    App scrolling through headlines, then, is functionally the same thing. Just a different UX, is all.

    • leisesprecher@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      What I find really worrying though is the trend to pick headlines that don’t summarize, but sensationalize and twist the content. And that’s not just a tabloid problem.

      I know that this is designed to generate more clicks, but since most people skip most of the content, only the headlines stick. And if these are wrong, misinformation will stick.

  • P1nkman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Sometimes. I’ll often read the comments to get the highlights, but I’ll also read the article if it interests me or when I need to know more details.

    • leisesprecher@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 hour ago

      And let’s be honest: 90% of news articles don’t contain more relevant information for me than the headline.

      “Politician said X” has almost never any effect on my life.

      I just scrolled through the front page of Der Spiegel. The first 10 articles are speculations about campaign decisions, analyses of things already known, and opinion pieces of some mildly knowledgeable people.

      Yeah, that’s mostly irrelevant. Yes, some background would be nice, but I don’t have time to read about everything that isn’t of consequence for me anyway.

  • IMNOTCRAZYINSTITUTION@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    If I’m going to comment then I read. Always seeing mfs asking questions answered in the article or raging about shit they imagined based on the headline alone. It’s embarrassing

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    My subscription feed is very small, selective. Then I read about a 25% of these articles, and another 25% I think the headline tells me all.

    If it is youtube links instead of articles, I click on only 1% of them. Most are just a huge waste of time even when their topic is interesting. People who post youtube links without writing a personal summary should get stabbed in their asses on both sides, so they can’t sit for four weeks :-)

  • Sundial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    If it’s a unique event then I read the article. If it’s just something like a cabinet pick, a nation’s response to another nation’s actions etc. I just rely on the headline.

  • j4k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I’m around 50:50, I read a lot of them but am prone to cynical hot takes on occasion. I’m particularly interested in social community and feeling like I’m at least present with others. Physical disability and in my case, the social isolation it causes–sucks. I’m here when I’m not able to do much else and need to escape. So that is my excuse for the times I’m not reading and the overly cynical hot takes.

  • Curious Canid@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    If you’re seeing a lot of material you don’t want to see, for whatever reason, you should look at which communities it keeps appearing in and unjoin those communities. Even if they would otherwise be of interest, they are doing you harm right now. You can always rejoin later.