Great one! I enjoyed the point that intellectual sharpness comes not only from reading but also from other sources—and how various forms of “reading,” such as manga or playing games, can develop other types of intelligence.
My conclusion: even though writers and books must evolve to provide formats suitable for modern audiences, we still need to return to traditional reading. It’s an activity we should commit to once in a while to balance out the quick dopamine hits that short-form content provides..
Just as building muscle helps prevent disease, we should engage in traditional reading to support our cognitive functions.
Thank you so much for the thoughtful comment and for reading! I agree that we do need to make time for the kind of focus and concentration...and all the benefits that it brings!
Andy Masley wrote a long blog post laying out the current state of play of Waymo approval in Washington DC. This could have been done by anyone at a desk, but I think is still valuable for someone to compile all of the information into one place. Maybe not *so* valuable that Masley could directly make a living from it, but a real public service at least.
More broadly, I think there are two reasons to read what someone wrote: 1. get answers to a question 2. to understand what questions to ask in the first place.
To get novel answers to 1, definitely need to talk to people and do real reportage. But I think there can still be an edge --- albeit a much more difficult one to obtain --- from desk writing if the questions asked are interesting and the work itself is high quality.
Super interesting perspective, and thank you for sharing! There is definitely something to be said for putting meaningful analysis together at a desk, especially by an expert. But I do wonder how much of that fact-gathering could be done by AI, with the expert adding context/opinion on top. All important questions we need to be asking ourselves as journalists.
Great one! I enjoyed the point that intellectual sharpness comes not only from reading but also from other sources—and how various forms of “reading,” such as manga or playing games, can develop other types of intelligence.
My conclusion: even though writers and books must evolve to provide formats suitable for modern audiences, we still need to return to traditional reading. It’s an activity we should commit to once in a while to balance out the quick dopamine hits that short-form content provides..
Just as building muscle helps prevent disease, we should engage in traditional reading to support our cognitive functions.
Thank you so much for the thoughtful comment and for reading! I agree that we do need to make time for the kind of focus and concentration...and all the benefits that it brings!
Thanks for posting the interview! I found it at parts interesting, depressing, and a good reminder I got to keep talking to people.
> Anything you can produce sitting at a desk is meaningless.
This is getting more true over time, but I think is overstated at the moment. To take an example from today: https://blog.andymasley.com/p/whats-blocking-waymo-in-dc-and-how
Andy Masley wrote a long blog post laying out the current state of play of Waymo approval in Washington DC. This could have been done by anyone at a desk, but I think is still valuable for someone to compile all of the information into one place. Maybe not *so* valuable that Masley could directly make a living from it, but a real public service at least.
More broadly, I think there are two reasons to read what someone wrote: 1. get answers to a question 2. to understand what questions to ask in the first place.
To get novel answers to 1, definitely need to talk to people and do real reportage. But I think there can still be an edge --- albeit a much more difficult one to obtain --- from desk writing if the questions asked are interesting and the work itself is high quality.
Super interesting perspective, and thank you for sharing! There is definitely something to be said for putting meaningful analysis together at a desk, especially by an expert. But I do wonder how much of that fact-gathering could be done by AI, with the expert adding context/opinion on top. All important questions we need to be asking ourselves as journalists.