A couple of men angrily arguing about what women do with their bodies. This is bound to go well. (And yes, I recognize the irony of me injecting myself into the discussion.)
And now, back to the real original question. I do not think that Naked News should be considered a naturist show. It's pretty clear that it is done both to arouse, even if it does convey some legitimate news in the process. Naturism is not about sex, but naked news is intended to be sexual.
Having said that, it's very close to naturism. For large portions of it, they really are just reading the actual news while naked. I think that if they were naked the entire time, there would be less of a striptease element to it. It's that slow unveiling of the body done in order to arouse the sexual interest of the watcher that makes it less naturist and more sexual. I think that removing the striptease element that would make it more of a naturist show.
They've done reports and interviews at nude beaches and whatnot. What do you think about that? Genuinely asking.
Like I said, it's very close to being a naturist show. Certainly, it's great that they are doing something to promote naturist locations. That is great advertising for those places, and it's probably not bad for naturism as a whole.
And having given it a little bit of thought, I would revise my answer. The question is too simple to give a good answer. It asks whether something is naturist in a completely binary sense. The question presupposes that either a show is naturist or not with no room for middle ground.
However, I think that there is lots of room for middle ground. It's good that the show promotes the normalization of nudity. That is very naturist. Also, it's great that they often do it in natural locations which shows just how wonderful an experience it can be to be nude in a natural setting. Those things about the show are great, and I'm sure that people who are more acquainted with it can give more reasons why it promotes naturist values.
Having said that, it also does have a tendency to sexualize simple nudity, which is not a naturist value. Also, it tends to teach acceptance of only very specific body types (attractive, generally low-weight females) rather than acceptance of all body types. As a counterpoint, I do know that one of the newscasters did the show while she was pregnant, so that is more in line with acceptance of variously shaped bodies.
So, I would say that it has some good naturist elements and some elements that are not in line with naturism. It's just not one of those things that we can slap a label on of "naturist" or "not naturist" then move on. It does not squarely fit into one category or the other.
It's like the various naked reality shows that have been on basic cable television in the US recently. Some make nudity seem like a gimmick and something to be laughed at, which is not good for naturism. However, they have helped normalize nudity on television. You now will regularly see bare butts on basic cable. That would have been unthinkable 15 years ago. Maybe there will be more normalization of nudity in the next decade or two, and we will have "Naked and Afraid" and "Dating Naked" to thank for it.