Charlie Brooker's How to Report the News - Newswipe - BBC

I'm from the UK and I'd go so far as to say the majority of the British press are toxic. They have an incredibly inflated view of themselves and they couldn't care less about what's in the public interest (just look at how they've responded to the recommendations of the Leveson Inquiry which investigated the repulsive ethics and culture of the British press). The UK press empahtically follow their own self-interests and agendas (and that includes broadsheets like The Guardian). There will always be individual reporters who rise above the abysmally low standard of reporting - but they are a tiny minority. TV news is better in my opinion - they at least aspire to some measure of impartiality. These clips from Charlie Brooker (British TV presenter) give a good sense of the formulaic way news is reported (strong language in the videos). this video link

I don't think it's zeitgeist only. Or at least, not on such a short scale. The pre-internet equivalent of that is interviewing random people on the street about current events, to fill the 2:30 of your news report with something vaguely related to the subject. Like in Charlie Brooker's "How to report the news": this video

Before Charlie Brooker started producing Black Mirror, he already was a highly observant critic of society and media. At one point he produced a generic news snippet of an unspecified event, where he pointed out all the standard videoshots and animations used these days to report on a topic [1]. He presented this "report" with the standard news-speak pronunciation of sentences. With this achievement of Amazon, and the recent development by China in AI news-anchors [2], one is not far off to see news reporting being done mostly by machines. Yes, some videography must still be done manually, but the rest could be automated. What that means for the TV news industry? I don't know, but it certainly deserves discussion. [1] this video [2] link

Pompous boring filler in the house style?[1] Yawn, no thanks. As you say, there are plenty of free outlets of information. What more explanation do you need? “Quality journalism” has its price, and the market doesn’t want to pay for it. Quality software has its price too, but the market prefers Linux. Wait, are you associating “free” with “low quality” or am I? Who can tell with quality these days. One thing’s for sure, it’s a difficult issue. [1] The text equivalent of Charlie Brooker's "How to report the news" segment: this video