IMDb RATING
7.6/10
554
YOUR RATING
PBS NewsHour is an news show which shows news updates.PBS NewsHour is an news show which shows news updates.PBS NewsHour is an news show which shows news updates.
- Won 1 Primetime Emmy
- 14 wins & 22 nominations total
Browse episodes
Featured reviews
The show is the PBS nightly news hour, with a venerable heritage begun by MacNeil and Lehrer, but has "progressed" through a series of successor hosts that have left it worse for wear.
Whereas it is award-winning, that doesn't equate to fair and balanced. The format features daily hot spots followed by lengthy analysis and interviews, but from a narrow perspective of New York and Washington DC pundits. Guests invariably represent the usual suspects from the Washington Post, New York Times, NPR, and PBS itself. Unsurprisingly, the gathered often marvel at what the rest of the country is thinking or doing politically, socially, or culturally.
The show's earlier incarnation was well-balanced and diverse. The current (2021) version is a bit heavy on feminism with men treated a bit like some relic of the past. Needs diversity.
Spends too much time preening about its fair and balanced reporting while missing the glaring truth that it isn't either.
Whereas it is award-winning, that doesn't equate to fair and balanced. The format features daily hot spots followed by lengthy analysis and interviews, but from a narrow perspective of New York and Washington DC pundits. Guests invariably represent the usual suspects from the Washington Post, New York Times, NPR, and PBS itself. Unsurprisingly, the gathered often marvel at what the rest of the country is thinking or doing politically, socially, or culturally.
The show's earlier incarnation was well-balanced and diverse. The current (2021) version is a bit heavy on feminism with men treated a bit like some relic of the past. Needs diversity.
Spends too much time preening about its fair and balanced reporting while missing the glaring truth that it isn't either.
For the past few weeks, PBS News Hour has not allowed for the uninterrupted and Full Coverage of both the Democratic National Convention (DNC) or this week's Republican National Convention (RNC).
The Worst part came when towards the end of Night #3 for the RNC. Just as Music Artist, Trace Adkins, was about to sing the United States National Anthem of "The Star-Spangled Banner" (at the Historical Fort McHenry where this Anthem was Born), the camera cut back to your news anchor, Judy Woodruff.
What's even more Horrific is when Woodruff outright lied about the song Adkins was about to sing. She said that he was going to sing, "America the Beautiful", when they had instead, just announced our National Anthem! To cut someone off from singing the "Star-Spangled Banner", our Nation's Anthem was Disrespectful and Treasonous! Lying about doing so is even More disgraceful and deceitful! Even if he was going to actually sing a different song, you could have waited until the song was finished and the audience applauded. Then you can go back to commenting on the event.
I'm Sorely disappointed in last night's performance! 😤😠😡
The Worst part came when towards the end of Night #3 for the RNC. Just as Music Artist, Trace Adkins, was about to sing the United States National Anthem of "The Star-Spangled Banner" (at the Historical Fort McHenry where this Anthem was Born), the camera cut back to your news anchor, Judy Woodruff.
What's even more Horrific is when Woodruff outright lied about the song Adkins was about to sing. She said that he was going to sing, "America the Beautiful", when they had instead, just announced our National Anthem! To cut someone off from singing the "Star-Spangled Banner", our Nation's Anthem was Disrespectful and Treasonous! Lying about doing so is even More disgraceful and deceitful! Even if he was going to actually sing a different song, you could have waited until the song was finished and the audience applauded. Then you can go back to commenting on the event.
I'm Sorely disappointed in last night's performance! 😤😠😡
Overall, this is my favorite news program, although that doesn't mean I don't have my complaints. I DVR the show every night, and watch parts of it to get intelligent and insightful coverage and analysis of the days events.
The first 15-20 minutes is usually very informative and provides a well rounded summary of the days news. Unlike CNN and other networks they don't spend 99% of the time talking about Donald Trump or other meaningless news in order to grab people's viewership for shallow reasons. On Fridays they have Brooks and Shields which is my favorite part of the program. Two political pundits who have a genuine, intelligent, non- partisan discussion about political topics, it's one of the few places on television you can find that. Shields and Brooks is definitely the most important part of the show.
Unfortunately, after the first half of the program it usually goes down hill and I rarely would watch an entire episode. They go into depth on special topics and social issues which don't ordinarily get covered on news shows. While these special topics are certainly valuable and informative, it's not something I feel is appropriate for a "news" program because these special programs are not really news. I have a limited time in the evening to watch the news, and I don't usually have time to spend it exploring topics that don't particularly interest me on a daily basis. It would be better if there was a different program on PBS that covered these social issue segments and focus the news hour on actual news.
I thought that the show was better when Jim Lehrer in charge. Nowadays most of the main news cast are women. In my opinion, this gives the show a point of view which is a bit too feminist for my taste. They oftentimes express attitudes about issues which they think is objectively correct but to me seems biased (e.g. see the interview of the author of the discredited Rolling Stone rape story).
The first 15-20 minutes is usually very informative and provides a well rounded summary of the days news. Unlike CNN and other networks they don't spend 99% of the time talking about Donald Trump or other meaningless news in order to grab people's viewership for shallow reasons. On Fridays they have Brooks and Shields which is my favorite part of the program. Two political pundits who have a genuine, intelligent, non- partisan discussion about political topics, it's one of the few places on television you can find that. Shields and Brooks is definitely the most important part of the show.
Unfortunately, after the first half of the program it usually goes down hill and I rarely would watch an entire episode. They go into depth on special topics and social issues which don't ordinarily get covered on news shows. While these special topics are certainly valuable and informative, it's not something I feel is appropriate for a "news" program because these special programs are not really news. I have a limited time in the evening to watch the news, and I don't usually have time to spend it exploring topics that don't particularly interest me on a daily basis. It would be better if there was a different program on PBS that covered these social issue segments and focus the news hour on actual news.
I thought that the show was better when Jim Lehrer in charge. Nowadays most of the main news cast are women. In my opinion, this gives the show a point of view which is a bit too feminist for my taste. They oftentimes express attitudes about issues which they think is objectively correct but to me seems biased (e.g. see the interview of the author of the discredited Rolling Stone rape story).
I am tired of hearing the same people who are the purported experts on this show. they provide little new views or perspectives and i do not know why the news for PBS Newshour should have so many contracted regulars when there are so many experts out there that have more insight to provide. Especially the Friday night editorializing which is really stupid as the two regulars that present simply provide there bias over and over. Judy Woodruff is boring and always saying "more to think about" and her interviews are shallow and lacking in direct challenges to those who lie on the program. She is really a weak interviewer and has little strength. Amanpour is so very much more well educated about the issues and direct in her speech and not as timid and weak as Woodruff, who i believe has passed her usefulness. I actually get angry when I listen to these regulars on PBS Newshour that are so redundant and lacking in depth. It is more of a small high school social group of people than real intellectual content and challenging ideas and good interview skills.
Gwen Ifill's absence is very apparent. Poor journalism, extreme bias, and lacking professional demeanor. It can't get better when you bring the same ignorant pundits on every week.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaCorrespondents report on important news events of the day. Their daily reports are also available online and on radio.
- ConnectionsEdited into Waiting for Superman (2010)
- How many seasons does PBS News Hour have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- PBS NewsHour
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime1 hour
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 16:9 HD
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
