It's not reporting if it's your guess. Again what they do is no different from what Chuck Todd or Andrea Mitchell or wolf blitzer do. You report what you know and then you analyze what you've heard and make guesses or opinions. The reaction is the way it is because of what the fans project on those guesses and opinions and I get it. I get that people are passionate about this stuff and we all want them to be good. No one should want bad movies to exist or cheer when something is bad. Especially if you spend your money on it. But there's also a fundamental misunderstanding of reporting and journalism that fans have. It's just like when fans want all the coverage of their favorite team to be positive and get mad at local reporters for not being positive. It's not the job of the reporter to soothe the fanbase or just tell them what they want to hear. It's their job to state what they know and what they've heard through their connects and if your connect tells you that the studio is a tad worried then you report what your connect told you. The difference is the fans can't single out a faceless studio connect but they can single out a reporter and kill the messenger. The same exact thing happened with spectre when the reports came out that Sony wasn't completely happy with it or the fact that the movie needed to make X amount in order to make a profit and it was a serious amount. Bond fans didn't get on some kill the messenger shyt even when the news had a negative spin to it because there's no point to that. I'm not going to be mad at anyone for reporting what they heard. That's their job. But I'm also not going to give a damn whether this reporter wants the movie to do well or doesn't. That has no effect on me and my enjoyment of it or lack of enjoyment. If he says based on what he's hearing Snyder might be replaced, okay that's what he heard. Now unless one or two or several of us can say otherwise or say we heard otherwise, how can we debate him?
he sick or something?
