Bill Bennett: Reporter's Notebook


Take a digital sabbath

I wrote this post in 2009 when spending one day a week offline was far less challenging than it is today. These days I might only get a day away from all digital screens every month or so.

Here’s the idea:

Set aside one day a week when you don’t switch your computer on.

A day when you don’t check mail, update Facebook or tweet.

No firing up the desktop for game playing.

It doesn’t need to be the same day every week. You may have to trim things according to needs and deadlines. You may only be able to manage one day a fortnight.

Go off-line and let the brain rest. Or, if not rest, allow it to change gear.

Take a break instead of constantly responding to incoming messages. Just let them pile up.

There’s always tomorrow.

You can de-stress. And before you say you find it stressful not being in constant touch with cyberspace, think again. You know that isn’t true.

The online world will go on without you.

Read books, chat to friends, play sport, enjoy the sunshine or bake muffins instead.

That way, when you get back online, you’ll be refreshed. It is like a mini holiday. It may sound like a cliché, but I work better after taking a day-long break from my computer.

Digital sabbath not original

The digital sabbath is not an original idea. If you are religious, the first sabbath came at the end of the first recorded week. The Biblical creation story says God rested on the seventh day.

Ancient Jews worked for six days then strictly observed the Shabbat when many everyday things were not allowed. They knew this was mentally and physically healthy. I first heard about the idea of a digital sabbath in an online forum – sadly I don’t recall who or where the original idea comes from.

Problems

It is harder to take even one day’s rest from the digital world if you have a smartphone, an ebook reader or if you use the computer as an entertainment hub for music and video. And you may have a job, or some other responsibilities that make going off-line difficult.

Nevertheless, I suggest you do what you can to give it a try, reconnect once a week with the analogue world.

I’m not perfect

I’d like  to report I take a full day away from my computer every week. The truth is, I don’t always manage it. Although I try to schedule a full day off each week, I generally only get a couple of full-blown digital sabbaths each month.

Apparently I’m not a geek

Originally published December 2011. Updated January 2026. After 40+ years in technology journalism, this principle remains central to my work.

Why detachment matters in journalism

The percentage may have changed slightly—technology has seeped deeper into everyone’s lives since 2011—but the core principle hasn’t: maintaining distance from geek culture makes for better technology journalism.

This isn’t about lacking technical knowledge. It’s about perspective. Technology journalists serve readers, not industry insiders. The moment you write primarily for other technology enthusiasts rather than the people who actually use technology in their daily lives and work, you’ve failed your audience.

According to How geeky are you? I’m only 15 per cent geek.

That seems right.

I fail because I don’t like science fiction or any other geeky form of entertainment.

Despite 30 years of writing about technology, geek culture hasn’t rubbed off on me.

I’m not comfortable when I’m with other technology journalists who want to talk about Star Trek or Dungeons and Dragons.

To say these things don’t interest me is an understatement.

We have science fiction books on our shelves at home. Visitors to our house assume they are mine. They are not. They belong to Mrs B. And apart from her reading tastes, she is even less geeky than me.

Computers do not mean geek

Most of the points I scored on the geek test come from work. After all, I’ve spent years writing about computers and technology, I know the difference between a Rom and a Ram.

Of course, I have more than one dictionary. It’s a journalist thing – they are tools of my trade. And yes, I confess I correct people’s grammar. Editing has been my job for most of my adult life.

In the past, people have commented on my non-geek status making me the wrong person to edit a newspaper’s computer pages, run a computer magazine or write about technology.

Detached

I disagree. A level of detachment means I can make better rational decisions. I’m less tempted to air my prejudices. It means I write for ordinary people, not geeks. In fact one of the skills I’m most proud of is being able to explain tricky things in plain English.

I’m a journalist first, technology specialist second. I can – and have – written about most subjects.

And anyway, most of my work has been writing for non-geek audiences. My lack of geekiness means I can better serve their needs. This approach proved especially valuable when covering New Zealand’s technology industry. Local companies need journalists who can explain their innovations to potential customers and investors, not just other technologists. Being able to translate technical developments into business and economic terms serves both the industry and the public better than insider jargon ever could.

The same applies when covering telecommunications regulation, business model challenges in media, or the impact of technology on society. These stories require understanding the technology, but they’re fundamentally about people, economics, and social change.

My journalism training taught me to ask “why should readers care?” before “how does this work?” That order matters. Geeks often reverse it.

Journalism first, technology second

This reader-first approach shaped how I’ve covered journalism itself. When publishers struggled with digital transformation, the story wasn’t about the technology—it was about business models, audience relationships and sustainable journalism.

When paywalls and subscriptions became necessary, the challenge wasn’t technical implementation but convincing readers of the value proposition. When ad-blocking threatened publishers, it was fundamentally about the broken relationship between readers, publishers, and advertisers.

Technology enables or constrains these developments, but it’s never the whole story. That’s why detachment from geek culture remains an asset, not a liability.

More on journalism and media: This post is part of ongoing coverage about journalism practice, business models and the craft of technology reporting:

The social web is the web

An excellent post cum manifesto from Dave Winer who has done some deep thinking about the web in the past.

Here he encapsulates one perspective on the current state of play that many of us would subscribe to even if it isn’t orthodox thinking.

Activity.pub is fine and good, but as Winer says, it isn’t the only open protocol. Links are essential, but I’d argue the RSS feeds first developed by WIner are equally important.

Ben Werdmuller andManton Reece prefer the term social web to Fediverse.

This makes perfect sense to me. Social web does a far better job telling you what to expect, Fediverse is far more abstract.

There would be a place in Ben Werdmuller’s otherwise excellent Publishers on social media are between a rock and a hard place to mention Micro.blog.

It doesn’t drive much traffic to my website, if any… but it gives me a lot of what Twitter no longer can. Also, it meshes nicely with Mastodon.

My site traffic is down by between 20 and 30 per cent now I’m not active on Twitter. I could make a faustian pact to get that traffic back, but at least I’m comfortable with myself.

My segment on RNZ Nine-to-Noon programme yesterday.

Apple’s profits sour and deep fakes get deeper

For non-NZ readers: RNZ is Radio New Zealand.