A Second Look (1964 TV program)

A Second Look was a Canadian current affairs television program which aired on CBC Television in 1964.

A Second Look
Presented byGary Lautens
Country of originCanada
Original language(s)English
No. of seasons1
Production
Producer(s)Barry Harris
Running time30 minutes
Release
Original networkCBC Television
Original release26 January –
9 August 1964
Chronology
Preceded byLet's Face It

Premise

This program, a successor to Let's Face It, reviewed up to three news stories per episode. It was hosted by Gary Lautens, a humour columnist of the Toronto Star.

Guests included British Labour Party parliamentarian Anthony Wedgewood-Benn and American political author Richard Rovere.

Scheduling

The half-hour program aired on alternate Sundays at 10:00 p.m. (Eastern) from 26 January to 9 August 1964, with Horizon broadcast on other weeks. This show was distinct from a 1969 CBC series of the same name.

Lautens, however, lacked television experience while having little say in the production. That, combined with a vague program concept made A Second Look unsuccessful.[1]

gollark: I blame some sort of weird interaction between insurance companies, regulation/the government, consumers of healthcare services, and the companies involved in healthcare.
gollark: The US healthcare system is just really quite broken and there is probably not some individual there who's just going "MWAHAHAHA, my plan to increase the price of healthcare has succeeded, and I could easily make everything reasonable but I won't because I'm evil!", or one person who could decide to just make some stuff free right now without introducing some huge issues. It's a systemic issue.
gollark: Yes, they do have considerations other than minimizing short-term COVID-19 deaths, but that is sensible because other things do matter.
gollark: The US government, and large business owners and whoever else ("capitalism"), don't really want people to die in large numbers *either*, they're:- still *people*- adversely affected by said large numbers dying, because: - if lots of people die in the US compared to elsewhere, they'll look bad come reelection - most metrics people look at will also be worse off if many die and/or are ill for a while - many deaths would reduce demand for their stuff, and they might lose important workers, and more deaths means a worse recession
gollark: That is stupid on so many levels. Is it meant to be some homepathic thing, where the blood is obviously even more worserer if they dilute it?

References
  1. Corcelli, John (May 2005). "A Second Look". Canadian Communications Foundation. Retrieved 7 May 2010.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.