There honestly probably isn't two hours worth of news worth following each day unless you're involved directly. Yes, you can get lost in the hour-by-hour cover

There honestly probably isn't two hours worth of news worth following each day unless you're involved directly. Yes, you can get lost in the hour-by-hour coverage of individual battles but you won't come away comprehending much about the situation from that low level view. You can spend all day doing that and at the end of the day all that becomes a footnote in the larger war like "mechanized forces attempt to move into outskirts of Kharkiv but have stalled". There are various think tanks and groups that do just that, trying to digest the flood of disjointed reports and propaganda into something resembling a coherent analysis. They don't know anything not covered by CNN or The Guardian though -- such groups are where the news organizations get their analyses. The Guardian for example has been linking the Institute for the Study of War's coverage a fair bit. Of course, the ISW is funded by American defence contractors so it helps to keep the bias in mind. At this point I'd suggest background reading. Post-Soviet history has other examples of urban warfare and helps explain how we got to this point.