For the next 30 days I am going to be relying completely on non-traditional news sources. I am going to stop reading traditional newspapers, watch any news on TV, or listen to the radio.
The point is that I keep getting told by members of the traditional press that social news cannot possibly replace traditional news. And I think it already has.
Despite that I am still reading 3-4 traditional newspapers (online) every day. It's the first thing I do every morning, just after checking my social feeds. And every morning a feel frustrated by the time I have wasted reading them.
Here is an example of news headlines on CNN:
None of these have any relevance to me as a person. None of them is useful for what I have to do. How can news about a local ferry accident in a very remote region of the planet be relevant to me living in Europe?
The only story that is even remotely interesting is the one about the lab burgers', but that is only because I like future trends.
Instead of turning to traditional sources (newspapers, TV and radio) I will be relying on 3 different sources:
If someone post a really good article from the New York Times on Twitter, then I am still going to read it. But I will not go the their site to see if there is anything new.
What do you think? Could you live without traditional news for 30 days?
Founder, media analyst, author, and publisher. Follow on Twitter
"Thomas Baekdal is one of Scandinavia's most sought-after experts in the digitization of media companies. He has made himself known for his analysis of how digitization has changed the way we consume media."
Swedish business magazine, Resumé