@Airbubba
(Not a pilot) To me, the strength of the assertions are proportional to the strength of the underlying data. That is, the reporter overhears a second- or third-hand comment that the plane is in two pieces and reports it as such.
Then he has a report from an authoritative source that the plane is largely intact and reports that, naming the source.
I think the reporter was being responsible in describing what he knew and the likelihood that it might be wrong.