Part of that is that they seem to run no commercials; at least, I haven’t seen any so the trade-off seems to be that in ways, they look like the local news. I agree with that.
Also, they’ve skyped (I assume everyone knows, that’s basically interviewing someone on a camera through their computer) a few guests on there. The guests so far don’t seem to be more of the 2nd string types but sometimes, the lack of glitz has its own charm.
Being charitable, they will make great strides in improvement! Last I watched I thought they were broadcasting in standard definition. The feed looked one step above a cable access channel.
I do hope things improve and some capital flows into it as a counter balance to the Shep Smith channel.
They’ll get there but they need massive infusions of cash and perhaps some guidance/producers to mold them- they aren’t far off from what I’ve seen- but their lack of funding and national exposure is keeping them back- hopefully cable stations will start picking them up- then they’ll become more successful and mainstream- fox started out the same way- except they had more finding and could hire professional handlers to help them present their message better- I remember the early days of fox- they were ‘trying too hard’ too- - and I’ve watched as experimental segments either succeeded or failed- trial and error- but now that fox has paved the way- young upstarts can avoid many of the same pitfalls by studying what worked and what didn’t at fox (and to take note that sexual exploitation only gets a network so far- but eventually the shoe will drop)