Journalism Stories and Depth

So I found this story while reading about the Fort Hood case.  If you're not familiar with the story, it's about a solider at a Texas post that goes on a rampage to kill 13 soldiers and overall wounding 29.  This new article I found about Fort Hood said that the woman proclaimed as the hero of this incident may no longer be the hero after all.  Here is the link to the story:

http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-real-hero-fort-hood-shooting-story,0,3638333.story

After reading this article, I started thinking to myself, "When do journalists have to retell a story just in order for viewers to understand and/or make the correlation between older stories and a newer story on the same situation?"  While most who have watched the news recently will have heard something about Fort Hood and the main contents of the story.  However, what about smaller stories?  Do journalists have to restate most of the facts and other information from a previous story in a more recent, updated story?  I did enjoy how this article gave new information along with a written piece and a video piece, but what if people wanted to know more details?  Of course in this internet age, it's not difficult to find more information about a story by just searching for it.  Also, a journalist could link a previous story to the updated story for people interested.  This would provide somewhat of a roadmap or chain to all the stories a station or a particular journalists does.

More about this article I found:  I thought it was an interesting piece about how Kimberly Munley just now confessed she was not the person who actually stopped the criminal, Nidal Malik Hasan. While Munley may not have known another officer helped her take down Hasan, I thought she would have mentioned before now that somebody else shot him.  While this story seemed to simply state recent news, I enjoyed the video better because it actually gives more detail.  This leads me to my next question:  Is it better for web stories about broadcast pieces to be shorter and give less detail than the video?  Personally, I think the written web story should give just as much information as the broadcasted video, but it should be written in a way that encourages viewers to actually watch the video to see more information.  I believe the written story should dive into more detail and give more facts and/or sides to the story.  It seemed with this station's take on this story, they hint to watch the video in the writing.  I think this can be a good thing, especially if there are different things presented in the written web story and the video included on the web.