If the political situation in, say, Nepal is reported on in The Economist that's certainly relevant and important to--not only the residents of Nepal and perhaps nearby countries--but those who do business with or travel to the country. However, many people in the West and elsewhere would perhaps be forgiven for giving the article a cursory skim or skipping it entirely because it's not relevant or important to them.

Pretty much - per the article - everything NOT being "news'ed." Don't let presentation and confidence fool ya. Most of "the news" isn't.

Either you understand the intent and purpose of that system or you don't.

The question isn't "what's important and relevant?" The question is: is this nonsense being presented as important and relevant actually so? Passively accepting and defaulting to "yes" is The Biggest mistake you can make.