News! - Speculation, Repetition & Interruption

I listen to BBC Radio 4 & World Service news & also watch TV news. It seems to me that insidiously, in order to provide content, interviewers often ask speculative questions, or even questions that they know the interviewee will not answer. For example, what will happen now that Yahya Sinwar has been killed in the Gaza / Palestine conflict. Similarly, politicians & pundits are asked to guess what will happen to tax in the budget.

I find this very frustrating & needlessly time filling. I want news programmes to tell me what has actually happened, where, & how it has affected people & the environment. If there is certainty about what will happen as a result, that's fine too. I want that news to be accurate & verified as far as possible. It may well be useful to ask someone with real experience or expertise to comment, that isn't what I'm talking about. If an interviewee can contribute evidenced information which suppliments the facts, then I'm all for it. 

What I really find objectionable is unsubstantiated waffle which is little more than guesswork. 

I've lived long enough to feel fairly confident that this is a relatively new phenomenon. The world was not filled with people who make a living from giving their opinion on everything & anything. It goes along with the whole PR, special advisors, influencers, celebrity, ethos we have now. I really don't feel that we benefit from any of it. 

News is very important. The public do need to be informed about what is happening in the world because we are all affected in some way by what happens almost anywhere. I also do think that we need to hear other points of view than our own. We do need to be challeneged & possibly be able to change our minds if appropriate, based on factual knowledge we may not have known.

While I'm having a rant I also find repetition really annoying. The presenter will outline a story & then bring in an often on the spot correspondent. Fine. But what I don't need, in a minimal timeframe, is a repetition of exactly the same outline of the story by both. Surely the job of the correspondent is to add detail to the bare bones of the introduction?

Finally I really hate the interview techniques of some presenters. The interruptions, the talking over in order for the interviewer to make a point. Surely if you ask a question you should have the courtesy to actually listen to the answer? I realise that the media think that we have the attention span of a gnat & each section of news is very time limited. I also realise that politicians are trained not to answer the question but to put across their party points of the day. But this can all be very counter productive to the listener. 

I'm coming to the conclusion that listening to the news is less & less the best way to be informed. Longer, in depth interviews can be much better, depending on the interviewer. 

No wonder so many people are reading the news on their phones & computers.