🧠 Doomscrolling vs Newsletters — what the data actually says

When we built thebilig.com, we didn't realise how important newsletter are to have a healthy digital information diet. Not just founders, but for everyone.

(See here to give us a quick upvote 👉 https://peerlist.io/thebilig/project/bilig--newsletter-reader )

We check our phones 96 times a day. Most of those checks lead to the same place: an algorithmic feed engineered to keep you scrolling, not informed.

Here's how newsletters stack up against social media:

📵 Attention

→ Social media: passive, fragmented, avg 15 seconds per article

→ Newsletters: active, focused, avg 5–10 minutes per read

🧪 Information quality

→ Social media: optimised for engagement (MIT found false info spreads 6× faster than facts)

→ Newsletters: human-curated, writer reputation on the line

😟 Mental health

→ Social media: linked to anxiety, depression, and sleep disruption

→ Newsletters: reading for just 6 minutes reduces stress by 68% (University of Sussex)

🤝 Trust

→ Social media: 39% of people trust what they find there

→ Newsletters: 68% of subscribers trust the writers they follow

⏱ Time

→ Social media: 2.5+ hours daily, most of it unintentional

→ Newsletters: 30–45 minutes of intentional reading goes a long way

The choice is clear, if you're trying to stay informed with a healthy digital habit, newsletters are the better bet!