I agree that the dialog is so dense and fast paced that it's sometimes hard to recognize the gems within all the noise. That said, I enjoy the intelligence of this show. The Genoa deal has been intriguing. From the get go, I've been skeptical of the sources gathered and the producers agenda, but it's obviously been loaded into the narrative as a slow reveal from a not so distant past into the elements that built it into a broadcast. Lawsuits (maybe wrongful termination, maybe damages for wrongful or illegal broadcast portocols, IDK...none of us know), finger pointing, poking holes in testimony are the glue that holds this story together. It's interesting.
However, in watching the build up from the audience perspective...with foreknowledge, I've got to question why they thought a broadcast was justified and why certain questions weren't amplified by the Red Team.
- ambitious producer who planted a military expert on another story who face planted, then faced with not getting hired again, happened to have a blockbuster story in waiting. This has been addressed, but not explored fully. I have a hard time believing that.
- producer follows up and does find supporting evidence from anonymous twitter forces and eventually a grunt that supposedly was on the mission.
- producer and reporter receive "miracle confirmation" from a ground pounder journalist who was supposedly in the area with pics.
- NY prosecutor DA/VP of Newa Division gets a mysterious visit from a clandestine source, that drops ambiguous hints and an inventory.
- The find a retired General who has an agenda stating that chemical weapons are justified and then agrees to an interview with a guy who he's had vetted. In that interview he structures his answers to appear that Genoa might have happened, but only in "what if" terms.
- ambitious producer realizing he doesn't have definitive proof alters the interview
- with all this on the board, newsroom decides it can't commit. Ambitious producer goes ballistic and reveals he has an agenda (something they all suspected). He doesn't like the President.
- another Hail Mary, a dead guy comes back to life to confirm the mission happened.
Now all that may have nudged a newsroom to go with that story, but with this kind of magnitude, I'd think they would still be reluctant. The twitter guy, the marine and especially the last marine weren't vetted in person again with direct questions. The NGO guy is corroborative evidence not direct. The White House guy's agenda is never questioned, though I always wondered why the hell he showed up to offer it...no tingles going there Sam? The chem warfare General's sanity was questioned, but not his agenda. The guy was proselytizing it's use before he was retired. Then he agreed to the interview only with strict conditions. The whole thing smells like a setup. These guys are supposed to be smart people. Are they so tied up on a scoop that they didn't see this coming...especially with the producer guy nearly foaming at the mouth?
I guess we'll find out, but I'm anticipating major embarrassment. Obviously Charlie should go...maybe Will and certainly producer guy...and gal...she should have put the breaks on this.
I don't lurk as much as I used to and I NEVER listen. Comes from being old and cynical.