We have, in a relatively short period of time, progressed to video largely due to an explosion in infrastructure that amazingly has barely kept up (or perhaps not quite) with demand. Whether this technology will support realtime productions is a moot point - it already does. Several representatives of the MSM have pointed out that these will inherently lack the verisimilitude of a professional news production. That point is laughable. But they go on to state that these will lack the slick presentation as well, and this seems to me a valid point.
We wouldn't have to choose between slick presentation and truth if the MSN hadn't made a collective decision that influence was more important than truth. They did, and we do.
It's certain that Big Journalism did make such a decision. The question I have addressed is whether that decision was "collective" - implying a conspiracy - or whether it can be explained in economic terms. And hence was essentially inevitable, and needs to be addressed on a systemic basis.That is my own particular FR hobby horse.
The Market for Conservative-Based News