Hearsay Grace
There could easily be an entire blog dedicated to Nancy Grace, and I’m sure there are many. Instead I would like to discuss her most recent coverage of the Foley scandal.
Nancy Grace has dedicated several of her shows (since the scandal became publicly apparent) to covering Foley. The last few Nancy Grace shows have been such terrible excuses for journalism that I find myself glued to Headline Prime like it’s stand-up comedy. I’m not here to criticize Nancy Grace as a person, as she is a well-educated English major, an advocate for children’s right and very experienced as an attorney but she should probably stay on Court TV where she belongs, and NOT CNN’s Headline Prime!
Nancy throws out leading question after leading question until her guests, who happen to be entirely unfamiliar with whatever subject matter Nancy has chosen to discuss, say precisely what it is that she wants them to say.
Inviting people onto a show, who happen to be experts in a field that is not related to the focus of the show, who sit on a panel and make ludicrous suppositions about what Foley did without having any background information, is not news and it should not be on a news channel.
I’m just as capable of guessing and formulating opinions based on hearsay, but Nancy Grace’s specialty is stating suppositions and unconfirmed claims as factual. Nancy Grace throws the word “allegedly” around her show interchangeably with the word “guilty.” For example, when Nancy refers to anyone accused of a crime of which she happens to disapprove, she roles her eyes and uses quotation marks that suggest the word “alleged” is a mere technicality that she must recite on air. Nancy Grace draws parrallels between issues that are completely unrelated to the point where her show is more reminiscent of a comedy routine. In fact, for the first time, Saturday Night Live devoted an entire skit to mocking Nancy Grace’s coverage of the Foley scandal. While the skit is hysterical, it provides a very accurate portrayal of the types of “journalistic” practice by which Nancy abides. To watch this satire, click here.
Allegedly Posted by MG
posted by Medill Media Watch @ 8:37 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
I'm not familiar with these specific shows she's been doing. I have only seen her on SNL skits. But if this is a supposed to be comedy, then I don't think it's meant to be in the journalism category. I think it's just meant to make fun of journalism and whatever issues are currently a hot topic. I think it's ok to poke fun sometimes - as long as the truth rises above the laughs. In other words, as long as the Foley scandal is being taken care of responsibly and media is covering it responsibly.
- AL
Thanks so much for commenting... but my point was that Nancy Grace was being made fun of because her coverage of the Foley scandal was TERRIBLE. SNL was mocking her because he attempt to put words in the mouth's of the guests on her show, was embarassing. My issue was with Nancy Grace, not SNL - I just used the skit as an exaggeration to point out how funny the real Nancy Grace show often comes across.
Since coming to Medill and doing the joint degree program, I've found a number of professors at Medill are laywers and some profs at the law school consider themselves "closet journalists." I'm not too sure where Ms. Grace falls, but I do watch her show. She 'interrogates' her guests like a prosecutor....which explains the 'leading questions.' I feel like Bill O' Reilly on Fox does the same thing...It seems like lawyers and other political guys with their own show have a specific agenda or outcome they want on each show. So the questions they ask and the answers they hope to receive need to fit neatly into that box. I don't think we should expect a Nancy Grace or Bill O' Reilly or a Megan Mullany (who is this chick?) to deliver a traditional news program. In my opinion, they are talking heads, 'experts in their own mind' who want to tell the audience what their point of view should be.
ES
Post a Comment
<< Home