The Writing King Your Ethical Ghostwriter. Your Story, Done Right.

Before 2014 I Spent a Thousand Hours a Year Watching Other People’s Work

TL;DR: Before 2014 I spent about a thousand hours a year watching other people’s creative work. After 2014 I spent those same hours producing my own. I did not become productive by giving things up. I became productive by changing what I did with the hours I already had.

People say they are too busy to exercise, too tired to cook, too overwhelmed to read, and too stressed to spend time with friends.

Then they watch Netflix for four hours.

Something does not add up, and the thing that does not add up is not laziness or hypocrisy. It is that the hours spent watching do not register as hours spent. They feel like the absence of activity instead of a use of time, which is precisely what makes them so easy to lose.

What was my own number?

Before 2014 I spent roughly a thousand hours a year watching other people’s creative work.

A thousand hours. That is a serious part-time job. That is more time than most people spend on anything they would list as an interest, and I was spending it on the finished output of other people’s effort.

After 2014 I spent those hours producing my own.

The book on this: Turn Off the TV, Get Off Your Ass, and Do Something is 270 pages on the arithmetic of your own hours, first written in 2016 and rewritten for a world that put the whole internet in your pocket.

Did you have to give things up?

No, and this is the part that gets misread every time.

I did not become productive by giving things up. I became productive by changing what I was doing with the same hours.

The distinction matters because sacrifice is a terrible engine. Anything framed as deprivation runs on willpower, and willpower is a finite resource that everybody eventually runs out of. What I did was not deprivation. The hours were already allocated to leisure. They stayed allocated to leisure. What changed was whether that leisure involved making anything.

The outputs since are not the result of unusual discipline or talent. They are the result of redirecting a thousand hours a year from the consuming side to the contributing side. Anybody with those hours has the same option.

Is watching bad?

No, and books that argue otherwise are both wrong and unhelpful.

Television is a genuine art form, some of it is extraordinary, and a person who never watched anything would be missing something worth having. I still watch things. The book is not an argument for a monastic life.

The question is never whether watching is bad. It is what those particular hours would produce if they went somewhere else, and whether, having seen both options written down, you would prefer the other one.

For most people the answer to that is genuinely uncertain, and that is fine. What is not fine is never having asked, which is where the thousand hours quietly go.

Why did the book need rewriting?

Because I wrote the first version in 2016, when the biggest digital distraction was cable television and the occasional smartphone check.

The world has changed dramatically since then. The competition for those hours is no longer a scheduled programme you have to be present for. It is a feed engineered by people whose full-time job is holding your attention, available in every room, in every gap, with no beginning and no end.

The 2016 advice was aimed at something you had to actively choose. The current version is aimed at something that arrives whether you choose it or not, and those need different arguments.

How do you find out your own number?

By counting for a fortnight, which almost nobody does and which does more than any resolution.

Not estimating. Counting. Your phone will tell you its part. The rest is a note on a piece of paper. Two weeks is enough to get a figure, and the figure is nearly always considerably higher than the guess.

The number is persuasive in a way that arguments are not. You can dispute an argument about attention and modern life. It is very difficult to dispute your own screen time report multiplied by fifty-two.

What do you do with the number?

Redirect instead of remove. Do not resolve to watch less. Decide what those hours are for instead, and the watching takes care of itself.

Start with a tenth. A hundred hours a year is two hours a week and it is enough to write a book. You do not need the thousand.

Make the alternative easier to start than the feed. Whatever you are redirecting into needs to be within reach, because the feed is always within reach.

Do not treat it as sacrifice. Framed as loss it will not survive a bad week. Framed as substitution it does not need to.

Count again in six months. The number drifts back and nobody notices without measuring.

I keep coming back to that arithmetic because it is unarguable. A thousand hours a year, for years, watching other people make things. Everything I have written since came out of the same hours, doing something else.

The Guides That Get Your Book Written, Published, and Sold

Four short, practical guides on writing, publishing, and selling your book, plus the occasional note when there's something worth your time. No fluff, no daily inbox clutter. Drop your email and they're yours.

We use MailerLite to manage our list and send these emails. Your address is used only to send you what you signed up for. We will not sell it, share it, or use it for anything else, and you can unsubscribe anytime.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many hours does the average person spend watching?
More than they would guess and more than they would admit. My own figure before 2014 was around a thousand hours a year, which is the equivalent of a substantial part-time job spent on other people’s creative output.
Is watching television bad?
No, and that framing is why most of this advice fails. The question is not whether watching is bad. It is what those specific hours would produce if they went somewhere else, and whether you would prefer that.
Do you need more discipline to make the change?
In my case, no. The outputs are not the result of unusual discipline or talent. They are the result of redirecting a thousand hours a year from the consuming side to the contributing side.
Why did the book need rewriting?
Because I wrote the first version in 2016, when the biggest digital distraction was cable television and the occasional smartphone check. That world is gone and the newer one is considerably better at taking your time.
Where do you start?
By counting instead of by resolving. Most people have no idea what their real figure is, and the number itself does more work than any amount of commitment, because it is difficult to argue with.

📁︎ Advice📁︎ Behind the Book📁︎ Productivity📁︎ Self Improvement

🏷︎ Attention🏷︎ Habits🏷︎ productivity

📝 Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this blog post are solely those of Richard Lowe and are based on personal experience and research. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as professional legal, financial, accounting, or business advice. Always consult with qualified professionals before making important business or legal decisions. Richard Lowe is not a lawyer, accountant, or licensed professional advisor, and this content does not establish any professional relationship.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *