I think more people should have this attitude (that you should not consume news):
https://www.econlib.org/archives/2011/03/the_case_agains_6.html
I have talked to people who are genuinely distressed by things happening in the news and are afraid to miss something if they cut it out. But usually information in the news isn't *actionable* even if it's important.
You might object, "Sure it's not actionable for me, but if no one consumed the news, even important things wouldn't percolate through society!"
That is probably true, but we're so far from the point where the marginal consumption of additional news is a net positive that I don't think we're in any danger of an under-informed network here.
This is one reason I am a fan of targeted advertising in principle — it *should* prevent people from polluting the information landscape.
In practice, I'm not convinced it works amazingly well, and the pursuit of it has done all kinds of damage to the information consumption and distribution architecture — plus it's involved creating incredibly juicy targets for adversarial actors like governments.