I did acknowledge that by the second definition, it is news (information not previously known), just not significant enough for me to attach much weight to it. I don't know who these CMs are or what their motives were in getting out their "information," other than their stated motive to force Disney to close. In my opinion, having that agenda may have colored what information they were accepting and discarding as they investigated. They may not be "random people," but they could be biased or even untruthful. So - not knowing the CMs - you have to trust the news organization that is doing the reporting to ensure trustworthiness. When I see that the headline misrepresents the contents (the CMs did not "reveal" wrongdoing - they just think it's happening), it leads me to question the trustworthiness of the news source. Then I see a picture of WDW when the article is supposed to be about Disneyland, and it leads me to question their commitment to accuracy.This story is maybe a degree more than, "CMs think this might be happening"- it's more like "CMs are reporting that this is happening." CMs have direct experience with Disney's enforcement of health laws and policies, so they're not just random people with opinions, right?
I wonder if you'd still agree with this statement (maybe you would) if it was applied to a different situation? You don't think "what someone thinks" is ever news? Or is it just what CMs think that isn't news? Just trying to understand.
I don't think it is productive to argue over whether or not the article is news. When I was younger, you could trust most news outlets to be both objective and accurate. That's not the case now. It's more important than ever to be discerning in what you accept as fact, and this article does not meet my personal standard because of the issues I stated above. Others may have different standards, and may consider the article valuable. In any event, it's perfectly understandable that reasonable people would disagree on how much weight to give the article.
At one point you said that the mere fact that CM's think this might be happening is news, now your'e saying that the story is more than "CMs think this might be happening." At this rate, there will be no end to the discussion.