In the void of the internet, there is no duty, no service, the long tail of distribution. From the pundit pot stirrers, to the Kardashians trying to look their concept of cute. Yet, social media is sold to the advertisers or the society of subscriptions. Vendors, serviceability.
It shows that this could be an entertainer, not a lecturer of governance, education, journalism, religion . Focusing on televisual rather than typographic expression; showmanship.
Since fiction is the legalese used for state protection for specific expression, not natural law.
This may suspend proselytisation and ideological presumptions of the viewer. All being part of a campaign.
So no controversy, politics imply two states at tension'n conflict. Along with fictional drama being within the subject. That's a charitable view. Keeping one's head down from the pot-stirring provocateur.
However, it's like a butler saying "It's not my job to have an opinion" it does bring questions, since it is not natural law anyhow.
I cannot tell the intentions of such an entertainment-ese layer. Since Interpretation and scrutiny of the media is used to help provide meaning. All the ideological presumptions will be guessed and speculated on, along with whether it being direct like satire or propaganda.
Whatever we reach and whatever we think. (Such as the clock metaphor, clock is the measurements of matter, the sociology of goals to tell the time.)
Right reasons, wrong reasons, undefined! Wow. Interpretation can matter.
I think of this writer snippet alot.