For Two Months, I Got My News From Print Newspapers. Here’s What I Learned.<br />Because I had avoided the innocent mistakes — and the more malicious misdirection —<br />that had pervaded the first hours after the shooting, my first experience of the news was an accurate account of the actual events of the day.<br />That sounds obvious until you try it — and you realize how much of what you get online isn’t quite news, and more like a never-ending stream of commentary, one<br />that does more to distort your understanding of the world than illuminate it.<br />And I’m embarrassed about how much free time I have — in two months, I managed to read half a dozen books, took up pottery<br />and (I think) became a more attentive husband and father.<br />People don’t just post stories — they post their takes on stories, often quoting key parts of a story to underscore<br />how it proves them right, so readers are never required to delve into the story to come up with their own view.<br />For instance, I didn’t see the false claims — possibly amplified by propaganda bots —<br />that the killer was a leftist, an anarchist, a member of ISIS and perhaps just one of multiple shooters.<br />It is exactly our fealty to the crowd — to what other people are saying about the<br />news, rather than the news itself — that makes us susceptible to misinformation.<br />Not only had I spent less time with the story than if I had followed along as it unfolded online, I was better informed, too.
