Is Nancy Grace Out of Line?

Nancy Grace is opinionated. We all know that even if we''ve seen the lady on air just one or two times on Headline News. Grace, who typically takes a slant and charges hard ahead, has been adamantly in favor of having Casey Anthony convicted in the court of public opinion. Whether Casey Anthony is guilty or innocent is irrelevant in this particular case. The truth is that Anthony was found not guilty-and that appeared to set Nancy Grace off today. Her reaction bordered on ridiculous and crossed the line of every journalistic standard ever put in place.

Mediaite has posted video from the Nancy Grace reaction on HLN. Grace uttered words in the video like "I absolutely can not believe that Caylee's death has gone unavenged.". But Grace wasn't finished with her reaction to the not guilty verdict. "In the end, tots moms lies seem to have worked," Grace added.

Casey Anthony could have or maybe didn't kill Caylee. That's not the point here. My question is how does a network allow an anchor that is supposed to be somewhatneutral the opportunity to convict someone in the court of public opinion? Grace may have been echoing the thoughts of many people when she watched the Casey verdict. But she wasn't echoing the thoughts of the jury who found her "not guilty" in a court of law.
The fact in this situation is that there wasn't apparently enough evidence to convict her beyond a shadow of doubt. So why does Nancy Grace believe she can convict Casey on her appearance on television? The person needs to be guilty beyond the shadow of doubt. How does Nancy Grace come to the conclusion that Anthony is guilty if an entire jury did not come to that conclusion?

Here's my problem with Grace and other people like her on network or national news. They dig in, take a stance(usually popular opinion) and exploit stories for ratings. Grace may feel as if she is saying the common opinion but isn't it quite possible her comments are more damaging than good in this particular scenario? What if by chance Casey has zero to do with her childs death? Is Grace going to personally apologize for going where she did today with the incredibly biased reaction?

Where is the neutrality in a situation that absolutely deserves and needs to have it? There is none. Grace apparently feels she is the judge and jury in this case and other similar cases. I completely understand that emotions sometimes create bonds that yield ratings. But isn't Grace completely over the line here trying to convict someone on television?

Maybe Casey Anthony was responsible for the death of her own daughter. She certainly didn't say or do the right things following her disappearance. As an outsider looking it, it would be easy to just jump to the conclusion that she lied so therefore she is guilty. She could be-who knows. The point is that Grace has just the sameinformation that the jury has access to-perhaps even less. So why would she feel she knows the absolute truth and goes on the record as saying the "tots moms lies seem to have worked?" It's just horrible journalism. In fact, it isn't journalism. It's much closer to what this exact column is-opinion/and or editorializing. It doesn't mean that Grace doesn't have the right to air her opinions. Grace can talk about the Anthony trial until she is blue in the face-but she isn't a part of the jury that has the responsibility of convicting or setting Casey free-and that's a great thing.

Can you imagine how long the jury would have been hung if Grace was in that room? Sure, it may sound noble to fight for the rights of a young child who lost her life-but isn't her emotion getting the best of her ability to stay neutral? Maybe that emotion is a little overplayed. We've seen people like Howard Stern, Rush Limbaugh and other similar hoststake hard stances just to get hype. Maybe Grace falls into the category of a shock-jock. Or perhaps we should pen a new name for people who act like journalists yet push stories with their personal opinionto the breaking point. Maybe she's a "news-goose"-pick your own terminology here. Either way, it's not her decision to make and she shouldn't be rallying people like a mob to go lynch anybody.

This is a trend in broadcast news these days to go deeper into opinion and less into facts and evidence. Grace should always be allowed her opinion but it often makes me wonder if she truly believes what she's saying or if she does it just for the sake of ratings. Nobody can have that strong of an opinion, can they? And if they do, should they seriously be on television masquerading as a news anchor? In my mind, there is zero credibility when someone has so much faith in their own opinion that their mind can not be changed. Nancy Grace is providing one horrible example of what journalism and news should be.