The need not to know

I remarked the other day on Twitter and Facebook, "I find myself operating more and more on a need-not-to-know basis." Let me flesh that out a little.

I am on a permanent need-not-to-know setting for the entire Kardashian family, their retainers, minions, and devotees.


For similar reasons, I do not require further information about the squalid career arc of Lindsay Lohan. I already have Scott Fitzgerald as a cautionary example, and a more interesting one, of youthful promise blighted.

With luck, it will now be several months before Tim Tebow is much talked about again. No particular animus here—he seems like a serious and devout and athletic young gentleman. It's just that ostentatious public displays of piety are not to my taste.


Neither, apparently, to the Founder's (Matthew 6:5-6).

It's nice that you are cooking a tasty dinner for yourself or the family, but unless you are prepared to divulge recipes or cookery techniques, I do not need to be informed on Facebook.

The same with what you're drinking, unless you're buying.

What anyone wore on the red carpet.

Public non-apology apologies ("I'm sorry if I offended anyone") can be dispensed with as a waste of time, attention, and breath.

I am fairly sure that there is no information I need in any online top-x-number list that demands a separate page view for each item to jack up the site's page view count.

Make that any top-x-number list.

As you have likely concluded from previous posts, published fulminations about how the Young People/Twitter/slang/whatnot are "destroying the language" may be safely ignored. And should be.


Peeves. I have little or no interest in your pet peeves. Probably you have no interest in mine, which makes this post something for your need-not-to-know list.