News and How to Use It

by Alan Rusbridger

Nothing in life works without facts.

A society that isn't sure what's true can't function. Without facts there can be no government or law. Science is ignored. Trust evaporates.

People everywhere feel ever more alienated from - and mistrustful of - news and those who make it. We no longer seem to know who or what to believe. We are living through a crisis of 'information chaos'.

And How to Use It is a glossary for this bewildering age. From AI to bots, from climate crisis to fake news, from clickbait to trolls (and more), here is the definitive user's guide for how to stay informed, tell truth from fiction and hold those in power accountable in the modern age.

Genres: Nonfiction, Journalism, Politics, Audiobook, History, Sociology

Audible Audio

First published November 26, 2020

Reviews

[Rosa Linke · Rating 2 out of 5]

Just and simply not worth it in my opinion. If I was super into the news business and stuff, as I should be according to my English teacher, it would have surely been an eye-opening experience. As I was forced to read it, it was way too long and as interesting as a... well, a dictionary, because that’s exactly what it is.

Rusbridger builds up this amazing idea of explaining what journalism is, why it is so important, and how we can save it from destruction. There are two problems with it. Numbero uno: he never really gets to the point. The book is literally a big fat introduction to the theme (and yes yes, I get the idea that it’s SUPPOSED to be like that because you can only figure out the main part by yourself, but really? If I have to read the whole thing, I’d hope to find some kind of “and they lived happily ever after”. I guess you should not go reading a dictionary expecting that, I have learned my lesson.) And secondly: I don’t...really give a crap?

Anyways the writing was okay and dripping with Britishness, which you would expect from a seasoned English editor. Nothing to complain there!

So if you’re really interested in the subject, this might be your book, but as mandatory school non-literature? I was hoping for Harari...

[Jim Parker · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you are going to take anyone’s word on the craft (yes, craft) of journalism and the plight it is in, you would call on Alan Rusbridger first. A long-time editor of The Guardian during some of its most celebrated stories (phone hacking, for one), he exemplifies the fearless, public spirited journalist who respects the reader, understands the medium he is working in, and defends his reporters against official intimidation.

But if you were going to read Rusbridger in long form on the subject of journalism, I would not start with this book - an A-Z dictionary-style compendium of journalistic issues, people and trends. There are some fine entries here, particularly his musings on the increasingly homogenised profile of journalists in mainstream media - white, tertiary educated, middle class.

But in the end, the scattergun and limiting construct of the dictionary format makes the whole of this very long work feel somewhat less than the sum of its parts. Some of the alphabetical entries (‘Zoomers’) seem rather arbitrary and merely repeat what he has said elsewhere (‘Young People’).

Ultimately, this is a book which falls victim to one of the innate failings of journalism that Rusbridger himself points to - a haphazard collection of facts and observations without a through-line. Having said that, there are some good individual elements in here. They just need an over-arching narrative. Yes, the title (‘News and How to Use It: What to Believe in a Fake News World’) suggest the book is a guide to journalism for the non-journalist, but I’d wager that theme was chucked in at the last minute by the publisher.

In short, the book itself doesn’t deliver on its premise. That may be because the epistemological crisis we are in right now is bigger than the fact that the internet busted the traditional media’s business model. Under-staffed newsrooms without specialists, the disappearance of Chinese walls between advertising and editorial and the rise of clickbait are all contributing factors to what has gone wrong with journalism. But what has gone wrong with journalism is part of a much bigger picture that has to do with the failure of neoliberal economics, the loss of the idea of the public sphere, the professionalisation of politics and the rise of nativist populism in the wake of the global financial crisis. That is a much more interesting story.

Still, if you simply want the lowdown on what happened to journalism, I would start with Rusbridger’s autobiographical story of his life in the trade, ‘Breaking News: The Remaking of Journalism and Why it Matters’.

[Ula Tardigrade · Rating 5 out of 5]

An engaging and eye-opening book, full of anecdotes and insider's knowledge. It's part style guide, part recent history of journalism, written with clarity and erudition. Sometimes it sounds like an elegy for the press gone, when you read about former standards and compare them to the current tyranny of metrics and breathtaking speed of producing the "news" on websites.

It is very important today to remember what respectful media should look like and what we are risking without them. I recommend this book both to the journalists, who face more and more challenges to do theirs work properly, and to the readers, who should demand to get reliable information and be taken seriously.

Thanks to the publisher, Canongate, and NetGalley for the advance copy of this book.

[Wide Eyes, Big Ears! · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this easily digestible essay, seasoned UK editor and journalist, Alan Rusbridger, presents the issues facing consumers of news in the fake news era. Some highlights: (1) with the large loss of revenue, news companies have far fewer fact checkers, even though they have superior fact-checking tools; (2) fake news is easily spread through social media because most people don’t check sources before reposting; (3) ‘journalism’ is not a protected title, anyone can call themselves a journalist or ‘practice’ journalism, so the quality can range from factual to propaganda or purely fictional.

Interestingly, he rejects the echo chamber lament - he argues that the ease with which we can search the web or share means we’re far more exposed to differing views, and that buying specific physical newspapers created more echo chambers, not less. He notes that younger generations watch little TV news, that they are most drawn to viral news items, and that media organisations need to adjust accordingly.

Finally he advocates for a skeptical, rather than cynical, consumption of news. Whereas cynicism starts with the premise that you can’t trust anything or anyone, skepticism starts with testing assumptions and checking sources with the ultimate aim of finding out the real truth. Hugely thought-provoking!

[Alessandro Tardito · Rating 2 out of 5]

All in all it contains interesting facts (although mostly very British-specific, but that I can understand).
What surprises me the most is that the author points out several times that amongst the qualities news must have, they have to be enthralling and stimulate the attention of the public and then… the author himself has the brilliant idea to structure his book as a dictionary, which is the perfect way to turn even the most interesting subject into pure boredom.
🤔

[Raymond Xu · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is a dictionary

[Miro Keimiöniemi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this one for school. It's an adequately interesting account of the evolution of the news industry with a lot of "behind-the-scenes stories", most of which are essentially just well-picked bad examples illustrating each topic. These were entertaining enough but what comes to the premise of navigating the world of fake news, it doesn't really provide any new insight nor does it reach a definite conclusion, which just makes it feel a bit like a memoir of the industry that has already seen its best days. Given that, it didn't really inspire me to get involved in, innovate about nor even read any more "legacy news" in the future either.

Might have been that I missed the point but after reading this book, I feel just indifferent.. mostly because I never saw the point the whole book was a setup for. It wasn't bad but it wasn't that great either. I can recommend it to someone who is really interested in the news industry but then again, I would at least hope that there are better alternatives.

[Heidi]

This was an interesting read about today's journalism in all its aspects. But I feel that for most readers, this will fall short of what they were expecting. Although the book is clearly marked as a glossary, many might be surprised by the fact that that really is all it is. I was expecting overarching essays that link several of the concepts discussed in this, to make it an easier read, but those essays were not present. The entire book really does function as just an A-Z glossary. I think the average reader might benefit more from books that take the essay approach.

The examples used are entertaining in some cases, infuriating in other cases. But there is little to no insight given in how to navigate this fake news world. Frankly, the entire things feels more like a prematurely written obituary for an industry that's terminal and so there's no real need to look for ways to save it. Which is quite a disappointing conclusion to reach.

(I received a copy from the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.)

[Paul Sutter · Rating 4 out of 5]

I remember at University taking first year Journalism, and learning all about the intricacies of the press, along with the responsibilities of having a free press. That was almost half a century ago, and there is little question that the world of newspapers and the dissemination of information has been radically altered.
This is the era of fake news and the like, but essentially there has rarely been a time throughout history that news to some degree has been falsified. In his book NEW AND HOW TO USE IT, Alan Rusbridger literally looks at the A to Z of news and reporting. He is the former Editor of The Guardian for twenty years, and although the author resides in the U.K., news has a universal appeal to it, and with that universal falsehoods.
The fact that the book runs the gamut of the alphabet with twenty-six chapters, coinciding with all the letters of the alphabet, does not detract from the topic at hand. For example under A he talks in detail about Accuracy, Active Reader, Aggregators, Atomisation, and Atttribution. It brings the world of news into complete focus, citing how those who bring the news to the world, whether via the written or spoken or written word, have an obligation to deal in reality and not falsehood for the sake of grandstanding and selling papers or getting viewers.
As we saw with the last President of the United States, there was no attention to detail and fact. Statistics and ideas were tossed like tissue into a tornado, manipulating the truth for the sake of sensationalism and absurdity on many levels. Rusbridger covers many areas of the media and while the book may be more geared to journalism students and professionals, the average person will see much truth in the ideas and opinions set forth.
Covered in the book are such topics as: National Security, Disinformation, Science, Verification, Duty of the Press, Investigative Journalism, Climate Change, Sources, Bribery, Brexit, and much more.
The future of the news is not without hope, nor about to fall off the cliff or enter the void. There are enough responsible sources out there to make sure that we do not stray too far off course, rather cater to the audience that thrives on fact, not fiction.

[Lee · Rating 2 out of 5]

Rusbridger has a lot of experience in journalism, having worked as an editor at the left-wing Guardian. With his years of wisdom, this book had potential, but it did not fulfill it. As others have pointed out, the system where he did entries as if this was an encyclopedia makes for a pretty lame book.

But the most troubling thing about this book is Rusbridger’s blindspots. He has an entry on “Bias,” where he quite fairly lambastes conservative British papers for their denial of climate change. He also criticizes them for their opposition to the EU, but his argument here is much shakier; he implies the reason these papers ginned up anti-EU sentiment was because leaving the EU would allow the owners of these newspapers to pay less in taxes. Maybe, but he does not provide much evidence of this. And this assumes that the readers were completely dupped by these papers, whereas a more convincing way of looking at this readers of these papers were already Euroskeptics and the owners’ interest aligned with their readers.

What is strangest though is that, in this section on “Bias,” he beats on conservative papers without saying anything of the bias of his own paper, the Guardian, which has its own ideology, something that it is not ashamed of discussing. A self-critical discussion of bias would have been stronger. At one point he claims that younger readers are turning to media outlets like The Ecologist. This is wishful thinking. The Ecologist is not “stealing ground from the mainstream press” as he avers, except in Rusbridger’s wildest dreams.

This work could have been interesting, but Rusbriger was not self critical enough to make it so.

Read 30%

[Gregory Taylor · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a former journalist, having worked in print and broadcasting, I remain both intrigued and devastated by the storms that have taken over journalism. Rusbridger, a brilliant and well-respected senior British journalist, clearly lays out the forces shaping this world both today and historically, in ways I've only seen skimmed over in the past. Beyond the sheer power and precision of his writing, what's most valuable here is the balanced view he takes throughout the book. Greed. Fear. Partisan politics. Ignorance. Laziness. Technology. Together, these have come too close to eliminating the possibility that enough people will ever be able to agree on something beyond the notion of "alternative facts," so famously spewed by the far (relatively) right. At the same time, he notes the foibles of the left as they chant to their own drumbeat. Little of this was discussed at the J-school I attended decades ago, of course, although I now have an inkling that some of the best and brightest must have seen it coming. In summary, while I try to apply both an open and skeptical mind, I cannot but weep for this harbinger of truth's demise.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Prose: 3
Interesting Content: 4
Perspective Shift: 3
Political Impartiality: 2

An interesting book with a dictionary structure that was alright, but may be a turnoff for some. Alan Rusbridger is such an amazing writer though, so it didn’t bother me too much.
The main turnoff for me was his very obvious political liberal leanings. Which, in itself isn’t an issue (I have more liberal than conservative views myself), but the issue for me was him trying to come across as an impartial commentator. It lost him credibility.

You’re better off reading his fantastic previous book, “Breaking News”, which has a story structure, was very well written, provided a lot more insight, and the inauthentic political positions were not as much of an issue.

[Bernice Yap · Rating 4 out of 5]

this was an informative read on the current media landscape (though with a strong focus on UK & US) and helped explain trends we’re seeing e.g. the rise of populism, infodemic of mis/disinformation, the erosion of consensus/evidence-based reality - many say the bedrock of democratic political systems, and a new age of post-truth and nihilism. reading this helped me understand a little better the crisis of our era.

though, i must say, the way the information is presented (in A-Z glossary style) made it a difficult read to get through.

[Katie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading the news, especially in the last few years, could be symptomatic of wanting a chronic migraine. This book is for those who want to at least understand why they’re getting the migraine. A well-researched and organized guide to understanding how modern journalism is studied and written, this book allows the reader to at least understand why stories are formatted certain ways and how the news has changed over time in the United States.

I received a free copy of this book from the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.

[Sam Hailes · Rating 2 out of 5]

Some useful and interesting comments on the media. But….
Alan Rusbridger, famously a former Guardian editor, constantly looks down on other outlets, especially right of centre ones. He criticises other journalists and editors who don’t share his politics. And - surprise surprise - every mention of The Guardian is positive! This bias is relentless, found on nearly every page, and it’s wearing for the reader. Ok Alan, we get it - you’re right about everything, and are enjoying looking down on everyone else! The book is also repetitive - partly because of the A-Z format. Would not recommend!

[Isobel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Since I read this book on holiday in Spain- I'll compare this read to paella.

In Spain I recognised quickly that all paella is good, some of it is dry, some lacking in flavour, some overworked BUT YET some is the tastiest food alive.
I which the chapters of this book are similar to! There are some chapters that you'll skip past and quickly forget, BUT there are snipets of this book will remain with me forever and have made me rethink the way I use and consume media.

Overall would really recommend as a light read to get u back into reading after a long break!!

[Ross Fossard · Rating 3 out of 5]

An enjoyable and easy read from someone who knows the industry well.

There are some interesting anecdotes and it gives a sense of how the industry works. I must say that there was nothing very surprising in there though.

You can’t trust everything you read. Who knew? Media moguls steer public narratives for their own profit? Shocking! Many reporters make things up and the quality of ‘journalism’ in the world of 24/7 rolling news is suffering? I’m glad an industry insider is there to tell me this.

[Christina Widmann · Rating 3 out of 5]

Rusbridger tells us to be sceptical - except about any topic where he has an opinion. He tells us to fact-check, but doesn't fact-check his own sources.

Half the book is quotes from other authors, so the style varies. As a whole it's readable as long as you like name-calling and hit pieces and don't mind some hypocrisy.

Read a detailed review on my blog: https://nouw.com/cwidmann/if-only-he-...

[Jonny Brick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good on certain figures in news reporting from the last century - Pilger, Wolff, Murdoch, Harry Evans - and on the big ideas in journalism: metrics, data, impartiality, the BBC model. Two decades running the Guardian has informed this guide, which suggests how to adapt to the post-newspaper era. Fun too, and essential for journalism undergrads and cubs.

[Julia Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this audio edition. Being a school librarian I knew a lot of what was covered, yet there was still plenty to learn and facts to shock in this up-to-date, interesting, easy-listening account.

[Shayla · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good review of how news is changing and why it’s so important.

[Ruslan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alan Rusbridger. That says a lot. I liked the book, which is easy to read and is composed rather of short essays. I think that every journalist will be interested in reading the publication.

[Sinisa Szabo]

Sad that this is how it most likely is.

[Tim Ozinga · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this to be a helpful book about the role of media and what we should be discerning, a good read

[samunwise · Rating 2 out of 5]

Overall a confused book. It’s not clear who the author is writing this for, and the dictionary format doesn’t add any value and comes across as lazy. A shame.

[Joao Scarpa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid “user’s guide” on new consumption though it’s dense and loses a bit of steam around T-Z

[Karl · Rating 2 out of 5]

The information is useful, but the audiobook version has a lot of technical issues. Had to get a refund as it was unusable from audible.

[Markwoods · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was ok. Badly titled, though. It should be titled An A-Z of contemporary journalism. The episodic, article nature did make it easy to pick up and put down.