Jump to content

Talk:Nancy Grace: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 30d) to Talk:Nancy Grace/Archive 2.
Line 30: Line 30:


I've removed a couple of things from this article. Firstly, the bit about the psychics... The conclusion drawn (she believes in psychics) is not supported by the narrative or reference given, and anyway isn't really relevant to what ought to be an informative and cohesive narrative biography. For similar reasons, I've removed the bit about her coverage of the raid on the FLDS compound. She's covered a lot of incidents, and people have objected to her position on many, many things. We don't and couldn't include them all, and since this one is not part of the more general narrative of the article it should stay removed. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#228B22;">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#228B22;"> T </strong></sup>]] 13:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I've removed a couple of things from this article. Firstly, the bit about the psychics... The conclusion drawn (she believes in psychics) is not supported by the narrative or reference given, and anyway isn't really relevant to what ought to be an informative and cohesive narrative biography. For similar reasons, I've removed the bit about her coverage of the raid on the FLDS compound. She's covered a lot of incidents, and people have objected to her position on many, many things. We don't and couldn't include them all, and since this one is not part of the more general narrative of the article it should stay removed. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#228B22;">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#228B22;"> T </strong></sup>]] 13:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


== BLPs and controversial incidents ==

I've removed a couple of things from this article. Firstly, the bit about the psychics... The conclusion drawn (she believes in psychics) is not supported by the narrative or reference given, and anyway isn't really relevant to what ought to be an informative and cohesive narrative biography. For similar reasons, I've removed the bit about her coverage of the raid on the FLDS compound. She's covered a lot of incidents, and people have objected to her position on many, many things. We don't and couldn't include them all, and since this one is not part of the more general narrative of the article it should stay removed. [[User:Avruch|<strong style="color:#228B22;">Avruch</strong>]][[User talk:Avruch|<sup><strong style="color:#228B22;"> T </strong></sup>]] 13:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)



Suggestion: Delete the subordinate clause at the beginning of the sentence "Because of her forward, opinionative and no-nonsense broadcasting style, Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy" reducing it to "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy." The introductory clause "Because of her forward, opinionative and no-nonsense broadcasting style..." is a controversial claim about the root causes of the controversies which receives no direct support from the three examples given and serves no obvious purpose other than to prejudge the issue in Grace's favor. It would be better, I think, to inform readers of the facts and let them judge for themselves whether the examples given demonstrate nothing more than Grace having a forward, no-nonsense style of presenting opinions which she clearly labels as such. The sentence "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy" achieves those goals--it's uncontroversial and neutral between admirers and critics of Grace's style.----JD

Small suggestion: Replace the word "acquired" with the word "generated" in the main clause. "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have generated controversy" reads better, at least to my ear, than "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy." To say a person's broadcasts and interviews have generated controversy doesn't prejudge wether the person has behaved inappropriately. Books, lectures, policies, etc can all generate controversy, but the mere fact they do isn't grounds for criticizing them. On the contrary, sometimes it's a compliment to say they do, especially when it comes to intentionally opinionative material. So if the word "acquired" was chosen in place of the word "generated" out of a concern for neutrality, I think that concern is misplaced, or at the very least being given undue weight given the awkwardness of its use in the context of the main clause.----JD


== Marriage and Motherhood - Other work? ==
== Marriage and Motherhood - Other work? ==

Revision as of 19:09, 27 August 2009

Template:Archive box collapsible

Incidences on tv

I'm not sure when they actually happened here are a couple of incidences that happened on her show which may be worth mentioning. Firstly, when Trenton Ducket was missing about a year or so ago someone named Bob from California called her show and much of the call was censored except the beginning where the caller says he differs with Grace's last call and then when he says "I thing you're a big bitch," and she proceeds to say that he is free to his opinion and then asks her guest a question about laying blame. I'm not sure if the caller was calling Grace a big bitch or the previous caller. You can check it out at youtube. The second incident was when someone in the control room named Elizabeth played a video in the background of Paris Hilton while Grace was talking with a guest about Paris' parole violations. Nancy tells Elizabeth to stop it and then starts going off on Elizabeth saying people like her (elizabeth) are part of the problem because they are blinded by celebrity. The video is available on youtube. I don't know if the part where the animal sex stuff comes in is legitimate or not, though.

for what it's work

On controversial legal/social issues I have a habit of maintaining a time line: year month day who did what where; after watching whole episodes of shows like Nancy Grace, I could end up with no hard factoid to add to a time line, just baseless surmise, speculation, innuendo and self-righteous rhetoric devoid of new fact on whatever case was at hand. That taught me a lot about the prosecutorial mindset and the hazards of the news media trying a case in the court of public opinion.

Other studies have shown me:

  • In the Bernard Goetz case, the prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence that Cabey was hit once and let the defense attorneys and the news media believe for two years that Cabey had been shot twice.
  • In the Ruby Ridge case, the prosecutor alleged Oct 1992 that Randy Weaver shot at the Geraldo Rivera helicopter 18 Apr 1992 in spite of a Apr 1992 field report by US Marshal W. Warren Mays that no shots were fired and 3 FBI FD-302 interviews Sep 1992 by Richard Weiss who was on the helicopter stating Weaver was unarmed.
  • In the Duke Lacrosse team rape allegation, the prosecutor ended up disbarred for prosecutorial misconduct.

Nancy Grace's performances as a one woman lynch mob do little to restore my faith in the news media or the criminal justice system. Naaman Brown (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BLPs and controversial incidents

I've removed a couple of things from this article. Firstly, the bit about the psychics... The conclusion drawn (she believes in psychics) is not supported by the narrative or reference given, and anyway isn't really relevant to what ought to be an informative and cohesive narrative biography. For similar reasons, I've removed the bit about her coverage of the raid on the FLDS compound. She's covered a lot of incidents, and people have objected to her position on many, many things. We don't and couldn't include them all, and since this one is not part of the more general narrative of the article it should stay removed. Avruch T 13:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


BLPs and controversial incidents

I've removed a couple of things from this article. Firstly, the bit about the psychics... The conclusion drawn (she believes in psychics) is not supported by the narrative or reference given, and anyway isn't really relevant to what ought to be an informative and cohesive narrative biography. For similar reasons, I've removed the bit about her coverage of the raid on the FLDS compound. She's covered a lot of incidents, and people have objected to her position on many, many things. We don't and couldn't include them all, and since this one is not part of the more general narrative of the article it should stay removed. Avruch T 13:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Suggestion: Delete the subordinate clause at the beginning of the sentence "Because of her forward, opinionative and no-nonsense broadcasting style, Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy" reducing it to "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy." The introductory clause "Because of her forward, opinionative and no-nonsense broadcasting style..." is a controversial claim about the root causes of the controversies which receives no direct support from the three examples given and serves no obvious purpose other than to prejudge the issue in Grace's favor. It would be better, I think, to inform readers of the facts and let them judge for themselves whether the examples given demonstrate nothing more than Grace having a forward, no-nonsense style of presenting opinions which she clearly labels as such. The sentence "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy" achieves those goals--it's uncontroversial and neutral between admirers and critics of Grace's style.----JD

Small suggestion: Replace the word "acquired" with the word "generated" in the main clause. "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have generated controversy" reads better, at least to my ear, than "Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy." To say a person's broadcasts and interviews have generated controversy doesn't prejudge wether the person has behaved inappropriately. Books, lectures, policies, etc can all generate controversy, but the mere fact they do isn't grounds for criticizing them. On the contrary, sometimes it's a compliment to say they do, especially when it comes to intentionally opinionative material. So if the word "acquired" was chosen in place of the word "generated" out of a concern for neutrality, I think that concern is misplaced, or at the very least being given undue weight given the awkwardness of its use in the context of the main clause.----JD

Marriage and Motherhood - Other work?

Am I the only one who thinks that the sub section of Marriage and Motherhood looks tacky in the section of Other work? Wouldn't this be a better fit under the section of personal life. Who agrees. Lighthead þ 02:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. I decided to be bold and reorganize a bit. Feel free to tweak.--Kubigula (talk) 04:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial Broadcasts / Biased reporting on pit bulls?

I need to find some verifiable sources, but what about Nancy Grace saying all "pitbulls" are "born vicious" and things like that? Wouldn't that demonstrate her lack of background checking and carelessness? "Because of her forward, opinionative and no-nonsense broadcasting style, Grace has conducted a number of broadcasts and interviews which have acquired controversy." Is this really a non-subjective description of her? Thanks wiki gurus, I'm not too savvy on wikipedia but would like to try to help out Charlesmartin82 (talk) 02:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]