I found this article difficult to understand. Key details aren't clearly enunciated like: Does the city know it's advocating for a pirate service? It isn't cle

I found this article difficult to understand. Key details aren't clearly enunciated like: Does the city know it's advocating for a pirate service? It isn't clear. The records and transcripts we're shown are super routine. There's no moment of dawning comprehension where the city (or anyone) realizes there is a problem. Is the service actually a pirate service? The smoking gun: The town's channel listing is matches one from a pirate IPTV provider - a provider called "Well-known pirate IPTV service". Could "Well-Known" have copied their list from a legit provider? There's no way to tell. Further down the article, we're offered up other details that seem tangentially related at best. Like how much the town will charge for service and a random mix of demographic stats. Lastly, the author was shooting for an entertaining presentation - which might be fine if the article was comprehensible. In this context, it's something to filter out in hopes that the article will make some sense.