Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA half-hour national news program from CNN.A half-hour national news program from CNN.A half-hour national news program from CNN.
- Récompenses
- 3 victoires et 4 nominations
Parcourir les épisodes
Photos
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- ConnexionsEdited into Commercial Entertainment Product (1992)
Commentaire à la une
Sensationalist Nancy Grace versus Intelligent Robin Meade
I have been watching CNN for years. I watched it before I even understood why or what the news meant. I have seen a trend, which I find, appreciative. Integrating humor, personalities and comments is a plus. Those comments have led me to respect Robin Meade, not as a beautiful face reporting, which she is, but someone with thought and knowledge.
When I come home from work, there's Glen Beck. At first, I thought he maintained certain perspectives that might not agree with my own. He did, however, intrigue me. The more I watched, I realized he is very pragmatic. I have come to respect his pragmatism.
Then there's Nancy Grace. Suddenly everything is sensationalized. All news is based upon a perspective. I understand that. Her language and videos and expressions accentuate certain facts over others. Her 'proof' of certain consistencies and inconsistencies...I find, less than appealing. I never would have watched her except that for some reason Robin Meade is supposed to promote her. I am curious about all things and will give most things a singular chance. I will not give her another chance. Does it matter, probably not. She's the t.v. inquirer so to speak and that seems to appeal to the majority.
I am simply curious as to why CNN feels a need to become the inquirer for x hours of the day? Is CNN greedy or losing money? Is this an experiment? All information contains a perspective. I trusted CNN's to be vetted. From the time Nancy Grace is on, I no longer know if I can trust CNN's information to be vetted. Will Nancy Grace spill into Robin Meade? May I still trust Robin Meade's information to be vetted?
When I come home from work, there's Glen Beck. At first, I thought he maintained certain perspectives that might not agree with my own. He did, however, intrigue me. The more I watched, I realized he is very pragmatic. I have come to respect his pragmatism.
Then there's Nancy Grace. Suddenly everything is sensationalized. All news is based upon a perspective. I understand that. Her language and videos and expressions accentuate certain facts over others. Her 'proof' of certain consistencies and inconsistencies...I find, less than appealing. I never would have watched her except that for some reason Robin Meade is supposed to promote her. I am curious about all things and will give most things a singular chance. I will not give her another chance. Does it matter, probably not. She's the t.v. inquirer so to speak and that seems to appeal to the majority.
I am simply curious as to why CNN feels a need to become the inquirer for x hours of the day? Is CNN greedy or losing money? Is this an experiment? All information contains a perspective. I trusted CNN's to be vetted. From the time Nancy Grace is on, I no longer know if I can trust CNN's information to be vetted. Will Nancy Grace spill into Robin Meade? May I still trust Robin Meade's information to be vetted?
utile•00
- thraxus314
- 17 juin 2008
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et regarder afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée30 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Headline News (1982) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre