Yesterday, I was listening to the podcast, Capital Allocators, with guest Chris Dixon. The conversation turned to media consumption, and Chris spoke of his framework in a way that I never had before thought. Chris follows a keto diet for his nutritional consumption and thinks of media consumption in a similar light.
Twitter is sugar. The news is sugar. In order to stay in a keto state, you need to eliminate the consumption of media sugar.
Reading a book is protein. Writing is a healthy fat.
I would add that Fox News is like taking cocaine intravenously, and watching OANN and Newsmax is like doing black tar heroin. Sugar, while not ideal, can be consumed in small quantities and should be done so smartly. These programs fall outside the food pyramid altogether and into lethal substances.
For some reason, this simple framework has me thinking very differently about my media consumption.
the counterfactual 
Love this analogy that makes it simple to understand. I would agree, and you could also add Instagram to the mix.
I remember reading something by Tim Ferris (or it was on his Podcast) about how when he makes informed political decision, he does not necessarily read everything – but instead asks his close friends who he trusts their views.
I didn’t mention it in the post, but Chris Dixon also says in the podcast that talking to a rational, well-informed person is a form of protein as well.