Business & Finance2 mins ago
Suppose this should be in tv section
9 Answers
but thought I'd put it on here. Why on the news do they have to have the reporter stood outside where something happened, hours afterwards, even in the bad weather? How much must it cost and at what danger to other road users etc? The thing I am talking about today is the reporter 'live' on last night's ten o'clock news from the lake where two men died yesterday afternoon. I would have been just as well informed if he had been speaking from a studio. Same with hospitals, if someone famous has been in there, or politicians etc. Fine if they are still inside and about to emerge with some ground breaking news, but hours after the event is seems plain stupid to me.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lankeela. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Or if something political is happening they stand outside 10 Downing St. On the regional news the other night, they reported that one of their reporters was stranded in his home town, and they went to him to show how bad the weather is there. My question was, did he have his own camera crew on standby and if not, how come a crew could get to him if he was stranded???
Even If its years afterwards I think Its many different reasons,Well first of all so the news wouldnt be boring as if every newstation told you the news from a studio and only one actually showed you the places where this news was happeing I know which one Id watch! Also to give you a sense of place so that you can understand what happened more as well as jogging your memory if a crimes taken place.