Ozandy,
So why didn't someone in Australia do what Google did?

"If you plonk children down in front of a TV for five years, without any parental guidance, you'll get frightened kids who think we're being over populated or some other such fantasy."
You could argue the same thing about any discourse though, including starving children, wars in the middle east and so on.
Also, the same is true for absolutely every kind of information medium mankind has- books, journals, newspapers, TV, the internet- all fall under the same problems as far as quality of information and conveying emotive terms.
An underhand tactic is an underhand tactic, regardless of what 'cause' it goes towards and how noble the person subjectively believes it is.

Sorry, I forgot what I wanted to say...the television's on.

King Hazza is partly right but of course the great failing of TV news is that it has set itself up as the bastion of serious discourse, yet it has no grammar, little or no context and is one way communication. At worst it's trite and banal. Yet at its best, it can be captivating. Rare.

What do we know of the world through video? That's it's fast and action packed. Yet looking out my window I'm watching my dog sleeping in the sun. The values of TV news are the values of entertainment. Some books try to make the same claim but for all of the American Psychos of Ellis and others, they are still caught in the subject verb object structure. We make sense of the world through grammar - something video doesn't have.