Today On TDG Is Jane Goodall Talking About Bigfoot

Steve (KT) may have been being facetious, but in any case, my stance is exactly the opposite- there's much to be done, and we're the people who must do something about it. I'm not religious, except in my own weird way about Science, but that doesn't excuse me from a moral obligation to Make Shit Better. In fact, I think the direct corollary of atheism is proactive humanitarianism.

I didn't used to care about news and politics. Gained a few years, maybe leveled once or twice- and now that I believe I can and must affect change Out There, now I care about news.

News is about reading between the lines. I have first hand experience with this in science news, where popular science reporting almost always gets shit- big shit- wrong. Mark is not so helpful when he tells you to read the Journal of Neuroscience, as there's no 'news' there. Just primary research articles, which aren't 'news'. New Scientist, The Scientist, and Scientific American are the best.

But I was interviewed by a local newspaper a few years ago, and my quotes were all distorted. Even worse, I wrote a goddamn article for a local magazine, and they even changed my title, making it sound impressive and arrogant, when I believe science is all about humility.

...

Anyway, I read cnn.com, but trust it more for accuracy where Paris Hilton is concerned than political events. I read the New York Times online, but mainly for the book reviews.

For politics and world news, I trust The Economist, and read it every week. It's politically moderate, pro-science, and pro-capitalism, and that's me. Also report news around the globe. Say what you will about capitalism- I think it's honest, and regardless of whatever politico-religio-social standpoint you might have, if you're in it for the money, you're gonna cut through the bullshit. That's why I like The Economist: the science writing is the best outside of New Scientist, etc, and they understand that science makes tech makes business makes money. In the grander scheme, the history of civilization thus far can be summed up in two words: Science Wins. From fire to chariots to Galileo to Hiroshima.

I read and generally trust wikipedia and metafilter, probably the best of the online-only catch-all sites. Can't stand boingboing, as it feels like a 20-30-something Bay Area/Sharper Image circle jerk.

I also read The Daily Grail. Which is more interesting than other sites. But that's news, in any flavor: it's one thing to read about an event and be able to discuss it. It's another, separate thing, to actually believe it occurred or understand why it may or may not matter in a larger sense.

This is why I only care about current events to a limited extent: history repeats, and the details don't matter. I used to buy into the Great Man theory of history, now I don't. Elian Gonzalez, Terry Schiavo, the Iraq war... each is simply a specific implementation of a particular narrative, tired and well-worn by the ages. Maybe I've DMed too much, but there aren't that many stories, and we live our lives and shape our civilizations by them.