It should be considered all a hoax until the media can establish otherwise. The onus probandi is always on a claimant (media) to, as they say in the vernacular, "put up or shut up." They almost never do with their stories; certainly not with stories such as this. We, the gullible profane simple folk lacking two neurons to rub together (in their view), are to simply take their word at face.

I think not.

If someone approached you with a wild story would you accept it on face value absent evidence? If not, then why would you give a pass to the media, an enterprise which has proven itself repeatedly over the decades to be a pathological bullshit manufacturing machine? Simply because the imagery they peddle is labelled "news?" Television is a simulation of reality. They are exploiting certain well documented perceptual & psychological weaknesses people have. It's nothing more than the proverbial smoke & mirrors and they are gambling you'll respond to their images as if you are experiencing first hand what they depict.

In this matter I've seen evidence that demonstrates the story is a hoax and no evidence it constitutes a real-world event. The media entities are tasked with creating and managing our perception of reality, to disconnect us from the real world and trap us in an artificial one of their making.

This is almost akin to playing god.