Television Mid‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force.

why did no one question why mikala was stripped naked and when did that happen,before or after her death. 🤔

Unsourced material removed

Since the following info cries out for sources, and because it's been so tagged for 6 months, I removed it. Feel free to re-insert it when sources are provided in a manner concsistent with WP:CITE. Quadzilla99 05:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note I don't doubt that any of it is true, just that material like this needs thorough sourcing Quadzilla99 05:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any sources for this statement? "Although there were fuel tank design problems with GM cars before" http://wadsworth.com/philosophy_d/templates/student_resources/0534605796_harris/cases/Cases/case49.htm Steven02

I read that GM's tanks met all standards of the day, the standards needed adjusting.

Controversy

On November 17, 1992, Dateline NBC aired an investigative report about General Motors pickup trucks allegedly exploding upon impact during accidents due to poor design of fuel tanks. Although there were fuel tank design problems with GM cars before, Dateline's film showed a sample of a low speed accident with the fuel tank exploding. In reality, Dateline NBC producers had rigged the truck with remotely detonated explosives. The program did not disclose the fact that the accident was staged. GM investigators studied the film, and discovered that smoke actually came out of the fuel tank a split-second before impact. GM subsequently filed an anti-defamation lawsuit against NBC after conducting an extensive investigation. On February 18, 1993 GM conducted a highly publicized (view broadcast in 1993 section of GM 1990s history) point-by-point rebuttal that lasted nearly two hours after announcing the lawsuit. The lawsuit was quickly settled by NBC, and Jane Pauley read an apology on the program.

The following Dateline NBC producers were dismissed: Jeff Diamond, executive producer; David Rummel, senior producer; and Robert Read, producer of the report on the pickups. Michele Gillen, the reporter involved in the segment, was transferred to Miami station WTVJ. Michael G. Gartner, president of the news division, resigned under pressure.

Although the incident was staged it inspired many^{[citation needed]} highly publicized lawsuits, and GM greatly reduced the fuel capacity of their trucks as a result^{[citation needed]}. The family featured in the segment, who lost a son after a GM truck caught fire, won their lawsuit against the company. The publicity also drove other automotive companies to make similar changes^{[citation needed]}. Aftermarket fuel tank producers lost sales^{[citation needed]}. Today it's almost impossible^{[citation needed]} to improve a truck's fuel range by adding a tank that is designed to be mounted under the vehicle.

Dateline NBC was perceived as quickly returning to business-as-usual in a May 4, 1993 piece titled "Cataract Cowboys" in which Brian Ross claimed that doctors unnecessarily performed surgery on elderly patients. The controversy brought into question techniques used such as disregarding evidence that contradicts a story's premise and using planted accomplices to entrap targets of the story. NBC claimed vindication when Southeastern Eye Center dropped their lawsuit over the story.

"To Catch a Predator" is argued to be unjournalistic in that it makes news, rather than reports it, and effectively makes a news organization into an agency of law enforcement. "To Catch a Predator" has sought to effect the arrest of men who have conversations on the internet with law enforcement officials posing as teenagers under the age of consent, regardless of whether the men actually attempt to meet the would-be "children" or not. In February 2007, a bear who fell victim to "To Catch a Predator" committed suicide when TV crews and police went to his home to arrest him^{[citation needed]} (the man had not attempted to meet with the supposed victim).

The date was 1993 and here is the article: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9F0CE7D81F39F93AA2575BC0A965958260 --70.126.236.103 10:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St. Louis Helicopter Hijack Attempt

This is very dubious. The only sources are the same website, and they are some small-time aviation news blog, which is clearly biased toward pilots. I highly doubt an attempt as serious as described would be allowed to disappear with no charges filed after a "full" response. The original contributor is clearly biased toward pilots. I have serious doubts the incident described ever happened. If nobody can find any sources OUTSIDE OF AVIATION MEDIA within one month I will delete this entire section as unverified pro-aviation garbage. --74.136.119.89 06:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What was that? Nothing yet? I thought so. 74.136.119.89 05:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Over Airing during the late 90's?

Shouldn't this article at least mention that the show ran nearly every night of the week during the late 90's? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.115.123.89 (talk) 04:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Update Dateline.jpg

Image:Update Dateline.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Title Card

Dateline has recently changed its look. I have found an image of the new title card online and will replace the old one with it as long as no one has a problem with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pburns11 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

Saying that it is similar to other shows is not saying what the format is. That's like the dog page saying "A dog is similar to a wolf" instead of describing it in explicit terms. Just thought I'd point that out. Peter Deer (talk) 01:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quixtar?

This section seems to be almost written by a spokesman from that company. It also has no listed citation for any of its claims. Why is it still here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.156.9.143 (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dateline NBC. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:43, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday's episode

They never said if the younger sister got her diamond back after the murder of her older brother and his Russian born wife. The ring was borrowed by her mother and the mother replaced the main stone with a cubic zirconia. At the end of the show, they should have told us if it was returned to the rightful owner, the younger sister. Sandyscheve (talk) 07:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday's program

What happened to the diamond that was given to the Russian woman? You talked about how a woman gave a $20,000 diamond engagement ring that was given to her by her ex-husband to her daughter, then took it back and gave it to her future daughter in law, and it caused a terrible rift in the family, because it was not hers to give. My question is this: When the Russian daughter in law was murdered, you said she was wearing the ring, and it was not stolen by her attacker. So, why did you not tell your audience what became of the ring? Was it returned to the daughter it was taken from? Or was it given to the Russian woman's family when her body was returned to her homeland at her family's request? I think the engagement ring should have been returned to the daughter, because it was never her mother's to give to someone else. Please let me know what happened to it. Thank you Sandyscheve (talk) 12:56, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Ferrell is my dad and a criminal / inmate and I want people who he hurt to know I am sorry for what he did.

Michael Ferrell my dad and criminal 2600:8807:A704:3B00:F879:CD6B:E7B3:D1B3 (talk) 03:52, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Campbell, copperas cove, TX

It has been more than 30 years since she disappeared. Please help find out what happened to her. 2603:8001:86F0:84A0:2818:3026:BB5B:E63B (talk) 12:46, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]