I had an interesting experience while in Thailand earlier this year. I learned that 'less is more' ... especially when it comes to political news coverage.
I was part of a mission team working in Thailand in February ... while the political primary season was still in full swing back here in 'the states.' We had more than enough to keep us busy over there ... but we still did what we could to keep on top of what was going on 'over here.'
For me, that included an occasional television news broadcast from BBC-Asia. While we were frequently far from a television set, there were times when I could catch up on what was going on. I would learn that So-and-So #1 had won the Such-and-Such Primary, getting whatever percentage of the votes that were cast, and earning whatever number of delegates for the upcoming convention. There would be some video of the voting, a comment from the night's winner (and sometimes one of the night's losers), and then an added statement about the winner's particular strength among a particular block of voters, So-and-So #2 dropping out of the primary race, or when and where the next primary election would take place ...
... and that was it. No thorough analysis of the most detailed minutiae of the voting numbers - 'who was favored by blind, left-handed glass-blowers over the age of 29?' And no over-long and over-amplified debate between a number of political analysts about what it did - and did not all mean.
Apparently, their decision in this particular newsroom was to focus on the steak, rather than the sizzle. I appreciated that decision then ... and I'm appreciating it even more during the current coverage of the conventions. Really, for something produced by people from 'the other side of the pond,' I think they've done quite well. I find myself no less informed ... but I do find myself a little less annoyed.