mrbadger wrote:I'm currently finding rather hard to watch all the way through this
Watergate Lawyer: If Donald Trump Tries To Fight Subpoenas, He Will Lose and I'm not going to get past the three minute mark, even though it's only 8 minutes long, because it's frankly, total nonsense. Not even slightly real news, and they have to know it. They are talking to watergate experts about tapes they themselves admit almost certainly don't exist outside empty threats in tweets.
Ah, now I see what the problem is.
tldr version at the end.
The problem is you're treating those things as news while they are most certainly not. I remember when I was a kid, my father used to buy several newspapers a week (since in my country each paper comes out on a specific day of the week) and they are "littered" with what you call "news". Event X happened at place Y + available statistic. Most are very short, because they're just that: fact of something happens without an ounce of opinion add on. News is when it breaks that an airplane had crashed at certainly location + how many number onboard under what conditions, news is when the investigation complete and the actual casualty report + cause of crashed is known. News is NOT about the station hiring a bunch of so call "expert" and make prediction or speculation about "what may have or have not happened" during the course of the investigation, at least to me that's not news.
My favorite newspaper was the one from the police. Reading their newspaper is like reading a log book of a secretary documented a board meeting, or a warehouse's ledger. The longer pieces on their newspaper is the one where they describe the actual investigations, but the majority of the paper are short, concise piece like I describe above. The paper itself doesn't have a lot of page, but you get a week worth of information because it's simply pack with concise piece of information without any extra fat. And to give an example of what I mean by a neutral tone:
A: Mr.X, who police believe to be the suspect behind the death of 20 murder case in city Y, has been apprehended at address Z after a combine investigation between unit alpha and beta. The suspect is now in custody awaiting trial in 20 days.
Comparing to:
B: Mr.X, who police believe to be the heartless criminal who responsible the ruthless murder of 20 people in city Y, has finally been apprehended at address Z after a long and diffcult manhunt between alpha and beta. The suspect is now in custody awaiting the day he will finally face justice and provide the victim family with much needed relief.
B is the version we tend to get these days, and often a lot more dramatic than that. But when I was a kid, version A was what I consider as "news". As I said above, what you just show is not a news service, but rather a talk show, it's a talkshow that talk about current news, but its purpose is not inform people but to provide entertainment to those particularly enjoy it, just like any other shows.
Not everything comes out of a new-station is news, maybe 20-30 years ago when the solve purpose of a news outlet is to provide outlet, that's no longer the case "anywhere" in the world. After all, if the only thing they do is report news and nothing but news, most station wouldn't need more than 2-3 hours a day on the air.
tldr: if we take one of the more political thread on this forum, and ask all participant to come to a studio to repeat everything we wrote in front of the camera, you'll get something pretty close to what happening in that video. But will you call that "news" ?
