I never said that need was "simple desire." :shrug:
If the "news" does not affect someone, then they do not
need to know about it, they simply
desire to know about it.
I'm glad you have realized that a discussion about the meaning of words is semantics. You initiated said discussion, though, so I don't know why you appear to think that it is bad simply because it is semantics.
The bottom line is that you argued that your standard for "meaningful" news was objective.
No, I have argued that my subjective standard for what constitutes meaningful news is objectively derived.
However, you admitted that your standard was subjective after I pressed you. You keep dodging your initial mistake with your semantic beef, but the mistake is still there. :shrug:
My standard is subjective, as it is a personal standard, but it is
still objectively derived. It is objectively derived because the premises I utilize are not dependent upon my own opinion, but instead something which is objectively determined outside of the self.
It has everything to do with your point. You said that those stories were not "real news" - those were your exact words. The issue, however, is that they are, in fact, "real news" according to the definition of "news". That's just a "no true scotsman" fallacy.
I have explained what my determination for "real news" was, and how that does not match with the general definition of "news". Someone
can disagree and correctly point out that I am, in some ways, engaging in the no true scotsman fallacy by arbitrarily defining "real news" as news that actually affects the people who receive the news, when I could have avoided such a fallacy by clearly indicating that I consider news to be the information which people NEED to know, and that if it is nothing more than information that they simply desire knowledge of, it should not be considered news, but rather entertainment. Of course, I assumed that the reader would be able to connect those dots on their own based on the same reason and logic that I have employed for my objectively derived subjective standard for determining what is or is not meaningful, but that was my error.