So true. Even full written transcripts don't represent the spoken word well, since tone of voice, facial expressions, etc. are missing. A person might be joking, or being sarcastic or self-deprecating, but that key information is lost. Coincidentally, I just read a paper about the degree to which after-the-fact documentation of an event effectively defines it, thus putting significant power in the hands of writers. The writers of newspaper/online articles after a press conference always focus on a small part of what was said due to time and space limitations; they report partial quotes, possibly out of sequence, paraphrase, etc. These distortions are partly caused by practicalities of filing stories to a deadline and a limited word count, and partly though various conscious or unconscious biases. So it's actually not surprising the stories are all different. When you see consistency, it's usually because a wire service put out the story, and many news outlets are publishing it verbatim (or sometimes they cut a few paragraphs out).