Washington Post goes goofy?

think, question, idea

I was just on the Washington Post website and it has a video (pretend video?) embedded and titled “Who is KHATALLAH ?” I was feeling a bit lazy about reading (listening can be easier) so I just clicked on the video so that someone (I thought) would verbally tell me information about him that I might not have…but here is where the Washington Post goes goofy. Rather than having a video with someone speaking and giving me information…the video is just text with sound effects (and lame ones at that!) It is pictures with subtitles like an old foreign film.

I would have preferred the Washington Post just put the text in an article (and skip the sound effects…) Why would I want to read their text (subtitles) with their sound effects? If I want to read with sound, I will put on my earbuds and listen to my own chosen music.)

Am I wrong about this?