• Patches@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because it fills up the 24/7 news cycle. If you don’t have 24 hours of content then the boomers could decide to change the channel - that’s not good for business.

    • spauldo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure, but that’s the BBC. Surely there’s enough news in the entirety of the UK that they don’t need to resort to astronomical phenomena that are both meaningless and invisible without measuring tools. Hell, tell me what part of the sky the planets will be - at least I can see those.

      • Solivine
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d rather have some meaningless astronomical phenomena in there, it’s a bit more interesting than more suffering and breaks up the negative content.

        • spauldo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s tons of meaningless astronomical phenomena that you can actually go out and see, though. “Jupiter and Saturn will be close together in the western sky just after sundown,” for instance. They could even have a star chart showing the constellations so you can identify them yourself. Easy to turn into a one-minute blurb.

      • fred@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They also get paid regardless of whether you change the channel.