The question of how much news people should consume is receiving more serious attention as mental health researchers document the psychological costs of round-the-clock information exposure. Both the case for civic engagement through news and the case for protecting mental well-being through deliberate news reduction present genuine arguments. Those who advocate for daily news engagement argue that an informed citizenry is a precondition of functioning democracy. Without awareness of current events — political decisions, social changes, environmental developments — individuals cannot make informed choices at elections, cannot hold governments and institutions to account, and cannot participate meaningfully in public life. News consumption is also a form of solidarity: being aware of the suffering and challenges facing other people and communities is a prerequisite for the empathy and collective response that social problems require. The argument that news is bad for mental health, from this perspective, reflects a privileged comfort with disengagement that those most affected by the events being reported do not have the option to choose. The counter-argument, grounded in psychology and media research, is equally compelling. The commercial architecture of modern news — driven by the engagement economics of digital platforms — systematically prioritises alarming, divisive, and emotionally provocative content over balanced, contextualised reporting of events. Studies of heavy news consumers show elevated rates of anxiety, helplessness, and cynicism, particularly when the events reported are geographically distant and the individual has no means of influencing them. The feeling of being perpetually bombarded with crises over which one has no agency is psychologically damaging in ways that the abstract ideal of civic duty does not redress. In my view, quality matters far more than quantity in news consumption. A person who reads carefully selected, well-evidenced journalism for thirty minutes a day is better informed and more mentally resilient than one who scrolls a news feed for three hours. Deliberate, selective engagement — rather than either total immersion or complete avoidance — is the most sustainable approach.