Surferbeetle, the people who buy or sell shares (and stuff) define the market price, not the ones who hold it.
The people who buy or sell can also be expected to have recently paid attention to news more than the holders.

I understand others people who read financial news or listen to them on TV believe they have info, but this info is basically already priced in. Whatever unsystematic distortion happens between info and conclusion tends to affect both you and all the others (buyers, sellers) on average. The market price is already aggregated including the info you get from reading or watching public info.
To believe that you get an advantage from such sources is about the same as to believe that you can process the info better than the one you're trading with. There's little reason to believe this to be systematically true.

Professionals who spend 60 hrs/week with consuming, discussing and digesting publicly and non-publicly available information on a narrow segment of the market get rich if they're correct more than 51% of the time. It's in my opinion delusional to believe you can beat your trading partner this way.

Or in another way: It's like believing that you can make profit in the betting market for sports because you are watching sports matches.



Focus on avoiding systemic risks and on keeping fees small instead and enjoy life by not looking at your shares' development or useless financial "news" more than monthly or quarterly.
A more thorough analysis makes only sense if you've got enough capital to diversify AND justify the expenses of a thorough analysis of a specific company, preferably a Ltd.