Avis des utilisateurs

I enjoy the content but it seems like 3-4x an episode they review everything you've already seen. It gets very annoying as they act like you have the memory of a gold fish

I miss the days of old when 20/20 did an hour long 60 Minutes investigative journalism style that covers several diverse stories. Now they do a single story that's two hours long about murder or kidnappings like Dateline does. They must've saw how good NBC's ratings were and decided to completely copy their format. Although the stories are competently researched & reported, they just aren't as well paced or hold my interest as well as those on Dateline. They also don't have a great narrator/reporter like Keith Morrison to give it that extra flair. But, if they could make it just an hour or get a better narrator, I might watch a little more.

The show is interesting...however LOWER the cotton-picking background music!! If you want people to watch and hear what the shows about... LOWER the cotton-picking background music!!! I'm going to keep watching for a few more episodes, and if you haven't LOWERED the cotton-picking background music...you've lost me as a watcher. Don't know how much weight my little review carries, but maybe there are others who feel the same as I do. Let's hear it folks, I can't be the only one who thinks the background music is overpowering. How can you decide if you like the show if you have no idea what's being said. Thank you for listening!

They keep repeating the same information over and over again after every commercial break. Lots of filler material as if they're trying to outstretch the segment longer than it needs to be. Lots of dramatization and loud music, which is necessary to keep attention but less is more when it comes to these things. It doesn't have to be THAT loud.

Usually it's instrumental music, but sometimes they decide to play corny radio songs that are supposed to go with the theme of the crime. Which is just blatantly disrespectful to dramatize crimes real people and families have suffered from. I get that we're all here for entertainment but it wouldn't hurt to have some empathy.

This show used to be so good, their episode 'A Monster Among Us' got me hooked. It was done right with a good musical score which was not overbearing or seemed like it was romanticizing the crime. Just the right amount of information and not a bunch of filler crap. PLEASE go back to that.

Guess I should have figured John Stossel was becoming corrupt. The minute he said that drug companies should be charging high prices to seniors, he lost me as a fan.

The show truely became stale when Hugh Downs left. :( Hugh and Barbara were a team. No wonder she's leaving. Probably can't stand John.

Frankly when she leaves, the closest competitor to 20/20? Bill O Rielly. I'm guessing it won't last long if John's the sole host.

Give me a break!!

Like the title says I really love the show. It goes in depth of each story.

But can ABC please remove the spoilers before each episode and before each break? I want to watch the episodes without knowing what's going to happen. I really dislike this.

David Muir is the cheesiest news program host bar none. Never understood why he needs a partner to do the light banter at beginning and end of show. Unbuttoning his shirt halfway down shows how lightly he takes professionalism in his field. Guess he's handsome enough to read a teleprompter? He shouldn't be allowed near hard news because he lacks professionalism and showed his Marxist bias while he basically attacked Trump during his, er, I mean Kamala Harris' debate against Trump. Ann Robach showed her true colors committing adultery on a National Stage. At least they had the decency to send her packing. The new hostess has done good news stories, so there's one bright spot. I enjoyed David's last hostess before Amy and I can't think of her name, but she was blasted regularly for having an alcohol problem. She's done some fine solo specials. Unfortunately, I find this to be #3 after Dateline and 48 hours in terms of quality, and honest journalism. But, I never miss a show and pay extra to watch on Hulu without ads. Dump Muir because he's too old to be dressing up and pretending to be a reporter. The new lady should be able to single handedly introduce and close the show. Might move it up a spot.

I think we can all agree we are tired of the recaps after each commercial break. My theory is that it is driven by advertising. They recap after the breaks so people that are channel surfing and joining the show in progress are more likely to become engaged. That's great for building your audience but it's kind of insulting to the fans you already have. At very least they should edit out the recaps when they sell them to streaming services or any other commercial free services. But the show has been on for 45 years so I doubt we will see any changes in the immediate future. The good news is we all have fast forward buttons.

This used to be okay. But lately narrators repeat the same info 3-4 times. And some details are not necessary; they don't move the story along. A 2-hour episode can be done in half the time.

The music background is too loud and adds zero value to the story. Come on, it's not a music video. Stop the cheesy music score.

The chronology in the storytelling is a hot mess. Throughout 75% of an episode you're more and more confused. Only in the last 25 minutes do things come together and you piece things together and understand - finally - what's going on. ABC, you're not making an M. Night Shyamalan film. Don't feel obliged to have twists and turns and spectacular reveals. Lately I have been so lost halfway in an episode that I just stop watching to get me out of my misery. I did exactly that just now. I recorded the episode, started watching but when I found myself uninterested and bored, I just stopped, deleted the episode and canceled the series recording.

Dateline NBC is 10 times better. Great storytelling. Soft, unobtrusive music that you hardly notice is there. Chronology logically builds and builds to an exciting conclusion in the last 15 minutes but throughout the journey, you're fully comprehending the progression of the story.

Over the years, when I can it has always been a tradition to watch "20/20" on ABC Friday nights at 10PM. This one hour news program has always been the most informative, and it features stories that touch your life, and the segments are often about the average American citizen just like you or me. Many of the stories aired are often controversial involving the law and crime, plus many reports are educational about your health and sex life and even sometimes they have celebrity reporting, but overall this program sticks to everyday common reporting. Plus the hosts, and reporting have always made this show A+ material, it was always great with legends Barbara Walters and Hugh Downs, now the torch has rightfully been passed to the fact finder John Stossel and the flashy Elizabeth Vargas. The myths, lies, and stupidity segments of Stossel's are just great, I love the way he proves the media powers and so-called experts wrong by his research and common wisdom. Overall "20/20" is a TV news legend that should continue to last many years more with great reporting like it always has.

20/20 used to be a compelling, well produced show for great many years. Enter the 2022/23 season - Just what has happened?! Gone is the captivating storytelling which is now being replaced with rush-for-ratings productions of inferior quality. The scripts are incoherent, the editing seems to be done by interns. The choice of music is beyond questionable, not to mention the sound level which many times surpases the narration. Add to it the completely unnecessary, cheap special effects, and you have the recipe for one inedible smorgasbord. The producers should rethink the road ahead, and perchance follow the example of one Keith Morrison who manages to turn even a relatively uninteresting subject matter into a compelling story, with no tricks or gimmicks used.

My husband and my favorite thing to do on a Friday night is take a gummy at around 7:15 so that we can be high around 8:00 to dog this show. It's literally hilarious. These are the absolute cheesiest hosts that repeat back what an interviewee says and add a question mark at the end and call it a question. There are three of these hosts and they take turns asking dumb questions and saying the SAME thing over and over like the audience is high and can't remember the damn crime details. After a commercial break they come back and repeat the same info AGAIN as if we forgot it all after watching two minutes of commercials. I used to watch this show as a kid with Hugh Downs and Barbara Walters and it used to be a pretty good show. Like a drama. Now it's pretty awesome if you're just going into it to laugh at the ridiculousness of the hosts. It's the literal opposite of a buzz-kill. Try it next Friday. You'll laugh your head off.

Used to be my go to Friday night show. Are used to do interesting stories interviews and in-depth reporting. Lately it's just been one crime story after another. If I want to true crime stories NBC has date line for that

"20/20," in my opinion, is a good news magazine show. During the time he was on the air, I enjoyed seeing Hugh Downs as the co-anchor. When he retired in 1994, I was really sad. My reasons for this are very hard to explain. If you ask me, it seems that nobody stays with a TV show throughout its entire run anymore. Still, I enjoyed hearing him report about what was happening in the world. I still think about him to this day. The only thing I don't like hearing about was when someone had been murdered or gone missing. Now, in conclusion, I'd like to say that Hugh Downs was a fine reporter who will be sorely missed. There will never be anybody like him.

Back in the days of Barbara Walters and Hugh Downs, 20/20 was the best news magazine show on TV. I especially liked their undercover investigations, busting scams and criminals. John F. Stossel did his "Give Me A Break" part very well at the time. The older 20/20 shows were the best! And I never missed a show. But ever since Hugh Downs left, the show just hasn't been the same. And now that Barbara Walters has left too, the show has become much of a joke. 20/20 used to be all about protecting the consumer and busting scams and criminals. But now, all they do on 20/20 (besides covering stories that are already all over the news, a lot of which is simply entertainment news) is bust myths. This is sadly, the exact same concept that has also brought down the Discovery Channel. The Discovery Channel used to be all about shows investigating both a lot in science and law, but now all they do is show stupid "reality" shows and bust urban myths. I just can't understand all of this, obviously the people in control of these TV networks today are just some really stupid (and lazy) people.

This show has become less and less interesting and compelling for several reasons: The reporters keep repeating themselves using the same interviews over-and-over within the same hour-long show. The indication is the producers don't have enough footage and/or content for the show's timeframe. Hence, as "fillers" they keep repeating the same segments during the show. This redundancy makes 20/20 painfully slow and much more boring than shows like Dateline or 48 Hours. Another new 20/20 feature pushing the show even further down the rating scale is its weird use of cartoon images throughout the broadcast depicting various scenes within the story. I don't know what the Executive Producers are thinking, but converting real-life videos and images into cartoon segments is incredibly irritating and distracting as it detracts from the reality of the show's intended true-life content. If I wanted to watch cartoons, I'd watch the Disney channel.

The articles on this show are all extraordinarily well done, and even some articles I wouldn't have ever found interesting (e.g. - a man who wrestles snakes) I find myself clung to. Also, Barbara Walters has passed anything above average in the world of news anchors.

People kept and keep complaining the existence of the superrich, who deprive the money and opportunities of the public. Therefore, it was truly lucky for Mr. Glenn Stearns to not be criticized for his decision to start another business, which this self-made billionaire hoped would earn one million dollars or more.

Mr. Stearns has already got a lot of money; however, this self-made billionaire still chose to attend a TV program which asked him to start a business undercover with only 100 dollars in his pocket on the first day. In the end of the show, he made it, and an expert believed that the value of his Underdog BBQ was 750 thousand dollars.

It is true that an entrepreneur uses or has to "occupy" a lot more public resources, which, in a way, gives people like Mr. Obama a reason to claim that "you didn't build that". The question is, entrepreneurs don't get rich by using public resources but by serving the public.

In a 2014 film, America, Dinesh D'Souza told his audience that the rich get rich because they offer their customers what they need in advance. He knew that because he himself, like Mr. Stearns, ran a little restaurant. This India-born gentleman did not rape his consumers off by offering a cheap but delicious hamburger.

People who believe that entrepreneurs take advantage of public resources should ask themselves some questions. Does it cost a businessman money to hire a driver to drive a truck that the businessman has bought previously to fetch the goods in another city, using the petrol which the businessman has to pay for? And once he earns, does he have to pay more tax than the truck driver he hires?

Back to Mr. Stearns' case. He started his new business in Erie, bringing energy and opportunities to this place unknown to him 90 days before. It is the trade and free market that bridge the connection between this rich guy living in California and the land far in Pennsylvania. Does that mean Mr. Stearns is ruthless? No!

In a barbecue festival, the Underdog team was making constant efforts to attract more customers. In order to prepare well for the next day, Mr. Stearns asked some of his people to stay up late to work. Most of his people was ok with that.

However, did Mr. Stearns and his team members spend so much time and energy because they love their customers? Frankly speaking, NO! They did that because they believed there would be payoff for that. For Mr. Stearns, he got the money to open the restaurant. For the other members, it secured their jobs and positions in the future.

So it was the case with a guy John Stossel interviewed once whose job was to heat the water for the cattle, which would become the delicious steak on the table of New Yorkers like Mr. Stossel. However, this man didn't seem to know whom Mr. Stossel was. "Whose John Stossel?" He answered in the documentary. Yet the man still worked diligently, which, eventually, offered Mr. Stossel good steak in the supermarket and earned himself sufficient money for his family, too. That honest guy loved himself more, but his work still made Stossel's life better. It was a WIN-WIN.

Therefore, the next time when you see people like Glenn Stearns on TV, don't think they are greedy. Because thanks to their "greed", your life is better.

(this article is just for exercising.)

20/20 is no longer a segmented magazine/reporting show. For now, each episode is a short documentary that reports and reveals a specific true story, more often than not, the story surrounding a specific crime.

Most of the docs are very good, but some are excellent, with inspired storytelling techniques crafted by superb direction and editing. A few have been so well done, I wonder why they haven't been nominated for awards.

I am not particularly interested in 'true crime' or 'inside looks', or reality TV in general, but I am a fan of fine film making and 20/20 has hit that mark a couple of times each season over the past few years.

You really have to stop with the background music. It's loud and annoying. I tried to watch S45 Ep5. I was so looking forward to seeing this because the crime occurred in my city. The background music was so loud, I couldn't hear the narrative. Sometimes there were vocals in the music at the same time as the narrative. I couldn't focus on what was happening on the screen because the music was so annoying. I kept hoping it would get better, that the music would eventually stop. But it didn't. After about twenty minutes I finally gave up. On multiple occasions I have tried to watch an episode and the background music drove me away. Please just stop.

This series could also be reduced to one hour episodes. Two hours is too long, repetitive and boring.

Once upon a time 20/20 offered outstanding investigative pieces by quality journalists such as John Stossel. So how did it get to the point where too-skeezy-for-TMZ Nancy Grace is now featured?!?! Nancy Grace??? Really???

Is this really the direction ABC wants to take its premier news magazine? There are plenty of tabloid TV shows on the air and, after the addition of Nancy Grace, most of them are more credible than 20/20. It's almost unbelievable that ABC is setting its sights so low these days.

It's so loud, that you cannot hear the story. Is it important to you for people to watch and turn on CC in order to follow the story you're trying to provide? I use to love this show. You are making it impossible to watch.

This show could be better if the sound track did not overcome the dialogue. It is not relaxing to watch, because I have to strain to hear the conversation.

Also, the show should be reduced to one hour, because the content is repeated and the show seems to drag. I sometimes have to watch it in pieces because I am distracted by the flatness from the repetition, and the need to break from the strain of listening.

Finally, there is a way to tell a story in which it is not so predictable. Last week Dateline and 20/20 covered the same story-the murders in Idaho. By far, Dateline produced a much better show. I want 20/20 to improve. I'm rooting for you, but I'm about to move on.