There are many factors in addition to language (spoken Cantonese, written formal Chinese, and informal written Cantonese) that make covering the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong so difficult. First there is a general unfamiliarity with the history and culture of the SAR by Westerners. Then there is the intentional blocking and distorting of information by the pro-government forces (in both Hong Kong and China) combined with the heavy reliance on social media as the major form of communication by the protesters. Add to this a very volatile situation with 3 distinct sites, each with its own characteristics, great difficulty in distinguishing facts from rumors, unintentional misinformation from intentional misinformation, and any truth from out-right bold-faced lies. The reluctance of people "in the know" both on the government and pro-democracy side from wanting to speak "on the record" makes verifying any information difficult. I think perhaps the smartest approach is to take pretty much everything with a grain of salt and concentrate less on the details and more on the big picture and larger trends. Besides, misinformation is a major tactic being employed by the government and that, in and of itself, is having some impact on how the story is unfolding locally and in the international press. Maybe every news story should have a notice at the top: Warning: this story is about the current situation in Hong Kong. It is virtually impossible to verify any and all statements for their factual veracity.