(Sorry about the words being all clumped together, will get the coding sorted out soon!)
Credits to Clara for editing this piece at ungodly hours of the night and a shoutout to Uncle Mike for your really nice comment on my previous post!! Thank you very much!:)


1. Bad puns

There are so many bad puns on every news episode(programme?) .There was once a piece on abandoned dogs. And I don't remember what it was exactly (or maybe I have erased it from my mind on purpose), but does it really matter? I mean I wonder if the scriptwriter realises that making LAME and unfunny puns about an issue such as abandoned dogs is distasteful and makes their news show look significantly less credible.

Maybe, they are trying to inject some light-hearted humour into otherwise serious pieces. I mean I can appreciate a well-crafted joke, but they should really think of a way to do it so viewers don't end up cringing at how inappropriate it is.


2. Pieces that leave you struggling to remember the issue being discussed by the end of the piece

Maybe you had to read that subheading twice because it's too convoluted. Well watching the news is like that sometimes. Except that my title actually has a point to it. For example, recently there was an issue where an opposition party leader allegedly failed to perform some duties/ misinformed members of the community on an issue which resulted in great inconvenience and discomfort to the people residing and working in his constituency.

So the government leaders met in parliament presumably to discuss the issue and find a solution to it. I use the word presumably because the way it was featured on the news made it look like an amateur secondary school debating competition- lacking focus and painful to watch.

Basically, party A was accusing party B of being being incompetent at carrying out its duties. Then party B defended itself by claiming party A had misunderstood them. And this went on for several minutes. (Yes this part was really featured for several minutes on the news). And as you might have expected at the end there is no resolution to the issue.

And yes, I recognise it’s not the fault of the news programme that the discussion was rather fruitless, but I mean why are you providing a platform for political organisations to air their domestic grievances with each other? There could have been interviews with people affected at the ground level or at least shorten the piece!

I just think the attractiveness of a quality news programmes lies in its ability to relay accurately and concisely information to the world. If you can provide interesting perspectives then great, but puns just don’t cut it. And yes, I realise there are issues with almost every major television news network/programme in the world but surely that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t hope for better right?


3. Do I really need a third point?

PAST • FUTURE