There is a general point here (which may well have been made by other commenters (?commentators?) and this is that, because we now have 24-hour news channels, the media seem to think that we need 24-hour coverage. Even when there is no story to report. Quite possibly (probably) because the broadcasters fear that if they don't keep reporing "nothing" they will miss the bost, and their rivals will beat them to it when something happens. We've seen it on a major scale (Diana, Queen Mother, 9/11, July bombings, Hammond, George Best - to name a few that come to my mind immediately). Sometimes when something major breaks all there is to say is "this monumentous event has happended. We don't know why; we don't know what the implications are. But we will go away and come back when we have something to tell you". But instead they wheel in expert after expert who all say "we don't really know anything but seeing as your paying me I will make up some random specualtion. Can I have my cheque now, please". Just remember: "News is what someone, somewhere, wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising".