despite murdering 4 people...
Annalisa at Annalisa.Burgos@HawaiiNewsNow.com finds their "tale" "fascinating"
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2025/02/01/dateline-special-revisits-fascinating-tale-mother-son-criminal-duo-with-hawaii-ties/

I haven't watched Dateline since the mid-1990s.

Rather than grumble about what they produce, I simply choose not to consume or give my time in any way to their garbage.

I'm actually a little surprised Dateline still exists.

I'll admit some of the stories are very interesting and informative, but over the decades, I've just not been that interested in situations involving people I don't know and will probably never know.

There are probably HI residents who knew the woman and her son, but I'm not one.

This is my own opinion.  Just like Big Brother, The Bachelor and CNN, there must be enough demand to keep them going -- until there isn't.

I find that HNN's finding of criminals "fascinating" utterly disgusting.

Yet somehow I'm not surprised at all.

I find that HNN's finding of criminals "fascinating" utterly disgusting.

Yet somehow I'm not surprised at all.

I wouldn't read into fascinating as a positive thing personally. To me the word is neutral. I could find the story of Hitler fascinating and that wouldn't in any way be condoning what he did or praising him. Evil can be fascinating to study.

I wouldn't read into fascinating as a positive thing personally. To me the word is neutral. I could find the story of Hitler fascinating and that wouldn't in any way be condoning what he did or praising him. Evil can be fascinating to study.

I would.  Just going by its definition.  Look it up.

I wouldn't read into fascinating as a positive thing personally. To me the word is neutral. I could find the story of Hitler fascinating and that wouldn't in any way be condoning what he did or praising him. Evil can be fascinating to study.

You wouldn't because you love to argue. Why is the sky blue?
Can you view this from the victims' family perspective? It isn't fascinating now is it?

You wouldn't because you love to argue. Why is the sky blue?

"If" the sky isnt blue then blah, blah, move goal post. Followed by (enter deflection). Finally, made up bad example.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

You wouldn't because you love to argue. Why is the sky blue?
Can you view this from the victims' family perspective? It isn't fascinating now is it?

I wouldn't because I don't assign biases to neutral words.

The victim's families may not appreciate someone finding the tale fascinating, I don't dispute that, but it is not impossible to look at an event, even an utterly terrible event as an outside observer.

When a lion chases down a zebra you may notice that it often clamps down on the neck to kill the zebra. The zebra is in a period of great suffering but I can still look at it with a certain level of fascination in the way the lion overcomes its prey.

I wouldn't because I don't assign biases to neutral words.

The victim's families may not appreciate someone finding the tale fascinating, I don't dispute that, but it is not impossible to look at an event, even an utterly terrible event as an outside observer.

When a lion chases down a zebra you may notice that it often clamps down on the neck to kill the zebra. The zebra is in a period of great suffering but I can still look at it with a certain level of fascination in the way the lion overcomes its prey.

Fascinating that you could not resist a response.
Your analogy of a murdered widow to prey is evidence of your perverted response to justifying your "fascination" of a heinous crime.

Fascinating that you could not resist a response.
Your analogy of a murdered widow to prey is evidence of your perverted response to justifying your "fascination" of a heinous crime.

Could not resist a response? You asked a question and I answered it. That is usually how discussions work.

You seem to be unable to separate yourself from an incident and look at it as an outside observer.

BTW I never said I have a fascination with the crime, I only pointed out that the use of the word fascinating by the author doesn't indicate a position on the crime because it is a neutral term.

Could not resist a response? You asked a question and I answered it. That is usually how discussions work.

You seem to be unable to separate yourself from an incident and look at it as an outside observer.

BTW I never said I have a fascination with the crime, I only pointed out that the use of the word fascinating by the author doesn't indicate a position on the crime because it is a neutral term.

I don't think it is a neutral term.  But you said you consider it a neutral term.  Can you show me where it could be universally considered a neutral term?  I'm not fascinated.  But I am curious.

I don't think it is a neutral term.  But you said you consider it a neutral term.  Can you show me where it could be universally considered a neutral term?  I'm not fascinated.  But I am curious.

We are free to disagree of course, to me I consider it a neutral term.

Universally considered a neutral term? I don't know if we could ever define words universally to where everyone would agree. I would say that it is a neutral term because it carries with it neither positive or negative implications. If a headline says "Court slaps down Trump suit" the word slap down brings with it negative connotations which make it a bad choice of words for neutral objective journalism. I would argue that saying something is fascinating does not bring with it negative or positive connotations. I would also argue that fascinating is just a higher level of interesting which is also a neutral word. If I look at a bad car crash from an angle of physics I could find it fascinating how mass and velocity interact to create the end result but I would certainly not be saying the crash was good.

We are free to disagree of course, to me I consider it a neutral term.

Universally considered a neutral term? I don't know if we could ever define words universally to where everyone would agree. I would say that it is a neutral term because it carries with it neither positive or negative implications. If a headline says "Court slaps down Trump suit" the word slap down brings with it negative connotations which make it a bad choice of words for neutral objective journalism. I would argue that saying something is fascinating does not bring with it negative or positive connotations. I would also argue that fascinating is just a higher level of interesting which is also a neutral word. If I look at a bad car crash from an angle of physics I could find it fascinating how mass and velocity interact to create the end result but I would certainly not be saying the crash was good.

Yes we can define words universally.   People who are wrong don't change a words meaning. Male, female, one, two, three, addition, subtraction are all universal words.  If there are no universal words, then anything anyone says can mean something else. Esp laws as no one would be guilty of anything because instead of going 51mph in a 50mph zone, the person could say, I was going banana speed, which is under 50mph.

I consider "interesting" and "curious" neutral words.

I consider "interesting" and "curious" neutral words.

This reminds me of

"Exciting!?, millions of people are dying. Exciting isn't the word I would chose to describe it". President Whitmore.

I consider "interesting" and "curious" neutral words.

I would agree.

Yes we can define words universally.   People who are wrong don't change a words meaning. Male, female, one, two, three, addition, subtraction are all universal words.  If there are no universal words, then anything anyone says can mean something else. Esp laws as no one would be guilty of anything because instead of going 51mph in a 50mph zone, the person could say, I was going banana speed, which is under 50mph.

You can try to define words but there will be some variation from dictionary to dictionary as well as in the way people actually use the word. Regardless we are not discussing the meaning of a word but whether it is a neutral term. No one here has disputed the meaning of the word fascinating.

Why is the sky blue?