Why is Fox or anyone else not showing hours of video coverage of this? .
Managing the sheep.
Hours of horrific covering might stampede the sheep. Might turn them against something like the news reporting about the Vietnam war polarized the antiwar segment.
The current views are similar to the barking of the sheepdog herding, turning, or circling the sheep herd into a self protective ball.
Just enough to alarm them into a protective movement.
In another scenario, hours of video could return segments back to 65 Watts, and later Miami and again, California forcing shop keepers to roof tops.
Or could turn some to put cargo vans near courthouses and daycares.
Hours of VIDEO could easily light that fuse.
Currently the hours of MEDIA dont paint that picture, perhaps an intentional gentler massage, a less demanding message, to guide the herd in a more manageable posture.
A maternal-paternal governorship could be messaging-massaging for their herds benefit, keeping them calmer, busier, occupied, and fed, and healthier.
A more evil step-parent type governorship could be messaging-massaging their herd for a different outcome using the same messaging-massaging technique.
The sheep herd will respond to these effective techniques, by feeding loosely trusting the dog; circled herd, feeding nervously, and nervous of the dog; or in full stampede.
The wolf pack outside the herd waits for the opportunity to feed. The message-massage alerts the pack to better feeding opportunities depending on the packs level of hunger and wellbeing.
It's pretty simple, to some of us.
The lack of video hours has been ordered so not to panic the herd, either by good parenting, or the evil step parent,
Or,
It doesnt exist.
Looking at the current media, if one compares NY governer C's reported comments, versus AL governor I's comments, the difference is very visible.
One appears angry, confrontational, and passing blame, and it's harder to see what is offered in people choice/responsibility to providing the solution.
One appears concerned, helpful, accepting responsibility, and giving more people choice/responsibility to the solution.
Depending on experience levels, individuals will have a different viewpoint on the effectiveness of those two governors, or reading their intent toward their people and state.
Until we very visibly see leaders pushing their governed to a united solution, like FDR did in depression and WW2 America, or two dictators did in the same time frame, we will have to use both our common sense and frames of reference to determine the benefits of those two governors actions.
EDIT: For less experienced readers, it is wise to view all media with the caveat "cui bono" or who profits.
If the leadership edict appears to serve only governmental interests and you can see it financially or actually physically harming you and everybody else around you, well then.
If you see it harming 75%, well then.
If you see it harming 50%, 25%, or 10%, again, well then....
If the governors edict benefits 80%, has loss, but recovery for 10%, has loss but slower recovery for 5%, and total loss for 5% requiring government recovery,
Compare that to edicts that only benefit the government, or the top 20%, and all recovery is dependent on the governance, and see more clearly which has the peoples interest at heart.
THAT is not rocket science. Choose wisely which form of governance you will support or believe.
In the benefit example where the lower 20% will have a degree of suck. They already do... this is just worst case.... that 5% on the bottom has always been around. There is no easy answer to financial equality in the real world.
To any person reading or offering opinion, think of the leadership potential your offering provides, tin-foil, chicken little, or solid evidence based opinion.
Know full well some will call tf, or cl, to solid evidence based opinion, when the caller has no frame of reference in experiences.
A certain amount of civility and respect is required here in response. Better to make a friend than enemy, and consider if your response will offer positive leadership, or divisiveness. Try for the positive. Please.
Best to you all. 40/40/20
vr