| User | Post |
|
4:00 pm October 21, 2010
| Nosfer
| | Rotaredom | |
| Moderator
| posts 2956 |
|
|
It's scifake…who I believe said he had been told anonymously that there would be no season 7, and also said he believed that season 6 was the last season, but something to keep an eye out on. Apparently "confirmed" by Britt. Interesting it says GHI when everything he's done lately has been GH and I don't believe he was in the last couple GHI episodes…so unless he had jumped over there (taking over for Robb?) now that Steve/Dave are back…
The interview mentioned did take place, and Britt has mentioned it and apologized on his facebook. The linked liveparanormal interview no longer seems to exist, though.
http://scifake.com/?p=3405
|
Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.
|
|
|
6:52 pm October 21, 2010
| Learjet
| | Australia | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1122 |
|
|
Pilgrim must have a policy of no speaky to anyone about anything or you get shooted.
|
|
|
|
|
11:08 pm October 21, 2010
| Revenant
| | Hopelessly Locked In A "Fear Cage" | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1393 |
|
|
The exclusive news that Britt was fired from GHI was very interesting and curious. However, what was with that article? It would have been nice if there was a bit more information in it. Such as placing Britt's comment in context. That's a start. Then move on to Britt's relationship with GHI. Is Robb officially gone from GHI? If so, had Britt been officially announced as the new leader of GHI or simply being on the show? I'm also curious that it only says that Britt is fired from GHI and does not mention GH. One would figure that it would imply that…but I'd like to know for sure.
Instead of any of that, we get some mondo-bizarro emotional rant over Freedom of Speech. It has nothing to do with that. Rick Sanchez from CNN just got fired a couple of weeks ago for essentially the same thing. Freedom of Speech didn't save him either. Yes, we are all free to say whatever we wish here in America. But, like anything else, there are consequences to our actions. We are living in the new age of political correctness. Right or wrong…there it is. We all know the game. We all know the rules. So don't cry when you speak before you think and get canned. It's the nature of the beast. So now Britt can go chase shadows on his own dime….
After reading that article, I remembered why I never go to that website…
|
"Skepticism is not a position, it's a process." -Dr Michael Shermer
|
|
|
4:13 am October 22, 2010
| Learjet
| | Australia | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1122 |
|
|
Revenant said:
We are living in the new age of political correctness.
We are, but Britt isn't exactly running for office where high moral standing is required either. He's a ghost hunter, he's not running for president so what's the fuss all about?
They get away with saying a few choice words on the show when startled by the wind.
|
|
|
|
|
6:20 am October 22, 2010
| Nosfer
| | Rotaredom | |
| Moderator
| posts 2956 |
|
|
The only thing I can piece together about GHI is that it does appear that he was filming with them. I dug through his cryptic tweets and there are indications of travel, big timezone differences, Paul, etc This was in the month of September.
He's been asked about it on twitter and has not responded. I would think if not true he would say so. But, still looking for something official. Things do point that way, though.
|
Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.
|
|
|
11:23 am October 22, 2010
| Nosfer
| | Rotaredom | |
| Moderator
| posts 2956 |
|
|
It's looking to be pretty much confirmed now. Scotty Roberts (TAPS ParaMag editor) is talking about it (confirming it) and sounds like it goes a bit deeper. According to him, Brandy Green was kicked off GHI prior and was behind the letter-writing campaign that got Britt booted as well. So, we should be seeing some new faces all around!
|
Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.
|
|
|
1:04 pm October 22, 2010
| patchoulifan
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 5 |
|
|
According to the forums at SyFy, Britt got the boot for doing an interview where he had some choice things to say about people who are not pro-gun, evoking a nasty euphanism for gay men. Lots of talk over their by the SyFy faithful that he should be able to say what he wants when he is not on the show without fear of dismissal.
Apparently, the faithful on the forums at SyFy are kids who have not entered the real world workplace as of yet. If you are on television, and use a disparaging remark toward a group of people, you better darned well be ready for the fallout.
I just happened to see all of this there today. I don't normally read their message boards, but I wanted to see if the GH Halloween event was going to be live this year, or another fiasco like last year. The indication I got was that it was going to be live. We'll see…….
|
|
|
7:58 pm October 23, 2010
| Mugs
| | |
| Investigator | posts 30 |
|
|
I have followed this almost from the start, with much to say and share this will be a long post – actually I likely will need to split it into more than one for sake of length. Please bear with me as I attempt to shed some light on this and share links & info that might help answer some of your questions.
Shortly after Britt's interview, the blogs/comments/forum chatter etc started regarding some of the remarks he had made during same. Albeit it seems most if not all of the comments & heated debates taking place right now are focused on one remark in particular; and of course Britt being fired [allegedly] because of that remark, with some rantings about Freedom of Speech [such as Scotty Roberts & the blog/article at SciFake]. When this first started there were several comments by Britt that were quoted – at least in the blog I read which is how I learned about this latest scandal; actually someone posted the blog & link on the SyFy forum and I went to it from there – not just the one getting all the attention now.
It is understandable why that is the case – seems to happen a lot with controversial & scandalous [if you will] scenarios, the focus tends to shift to a key point - but at the same time, IMO other remarks Britt made should be considered as well….should be part of the equation so to speak as it wasn't just the one remark – or slip of the tongue as Scotty keeps referring to it as – that drew fire.
As others have said, including Anita Brown [@ Dayton, Examiner site] in her blog – which is the one I initially read – and follow-up comments, you should listen to the interview and hear the context in which each comment was made and decide for yourself. Anita's blog titled 'Paranoia, homophobia, and racism on the front lines of the paranormal field' [post date: October 1, 2010] – IMO it & the comments left, certain ones in particular, is a good place to start since it is from when this whole thing began to unfold - can be read here:
http://www.examiner.com/paranormal-in-dayton/Paranoia-homophobia-and-racism-on-the-front-lines-of-the-paranormal-field
Britt comments a few times [first one was 2weeks ago - in which he speaks to each of the remarks she quoted, more on that in a bit] as did Scotty Roberts. Frankly Scotty's comments were heated rants and a straight on attack of Anita – he pretty much downplayed if not ignored the fact that it wasn't just Anita but many people who were outraged by Britt's remarks, and since his posting many more yet have spoken out – and some of the remarks he made were as disgusting as Britt's [interview remarks] IMO, and downright ridiculous. Just as the rants he has posted at other sites have been. The guy is out in left field as far as I'm concerned, he just doesn't seem to get the bottom line in all of this which Revenant aptly pointed out: we are each responsible for our own actions, say and/or do what you will but be prepared to accept whatever consequences come from same.
Scotty is the Editor-in-Chief of the TAPS mag, thus a representative of TAPS, who has come out to publicly defend Britt [his anger is overtly obvious, he didn't need to say he was as he did] but IMO he has done far more damage than good. He has insulted people and made various accusations in his ramblings at a different sites that, ironically, included things which he himself was doing [hypocrite comes to mind].
For example, one of his opening remarks to Anita was, quote: Rather than incorporating the research of a journalist, you take out-of-context statements and spin them in order to create an case. And then in a more recent posting on the SyFy forum he made accusations against Brandy Green. Scotty Roberts said, quote:
Adding to the incediary mix is the fact that the person who wrote the letters to SyFy execs was none other than Brandy Green, who was disgruntled and in "revenge mode" over her termination from GHI. She had a personal axe to grind, and took it out on Britt because she saw an easy opening to express her personal angst. And in another post he stated this in response to another who questioned the integrity of his claims regarding Brandy……
As for your claims of my statements of inaccuracy, you are welcome to your opinion. Suffice it to say, my sources are solid. end quote
Yes well not only were his so-called sources not as solid as he wanted others to believe, when he later responded to Brandy – who came to SyFy forum to set the record straight – noting what he was told, it certainly appears to me that he took what was said to him and put his own spin on it. So as a so-called Journalist he not only did not have his facts straight, but then took what he was told and interpreted it to 'fit his agenda'….. spun it in order to create a case just as he had accused Anita of doing lol.
Brandy did a fairly long post so I won't be quoting all that she said: an interesting read, I'll provide a link to the pg so you can read all of Scotty's remarks; her rebuttal; his apology to her for getting it wrong; her accepting his apology; remarks from others etc. Will simply provide this quoted snippet which speaks to the wrongful accusations Scotty made against her. Brandy said, quote:
I don't know what I find more amusing, Roberts. The fact that you actually believe that I have enough pull to get someone fired off of a show that I CHOSE NOT TO GO BACK TO (I have the e-mail to and from my executive producer, if you wish to correct your statement that you are basing from third party "information"), or the fact that you are actually trying to defend ignorance. If you really want to know the truth, I suggest you contact GLAAD yourself and you will find that they are the ones that are the direct link to Britt being fired. Not me. Either way, I am no longer apart of the show, therefor why would it matter to me who is appearing on it? At this point, I don't support anyone that is on it. That's not a secret. Britt wasn't taking my position on the show, so why would I bother? Yes, I used my freedom of speech to state that I did not agree with his actions. I never denied that nor is it a secret. end quote
Their full exchange etc: http://forums.syfy.com/index.php?showtopic=2351289&st=20
Britt is a grown man who can speak for himself – goes without saying he's not one to shy away from speaking his mind, and he's boldly stated a few times [quote] 'I am who I am and I am not ashamed of that…[and]…I am not changing who I am, I am not a fake person' - yet you wouldn't think so based on all the commentary from Roberts and the way he came out swinging off-the-hop. Frankly, given some of his [Roberts] remarks & accusations it makes me wonder what his true motives are.
To be continued……
|
|
|
11:55 pm October 23, 2010
| Mugs
| | |
| Investigator | posts 30 |
|
|
Nosfer noted that the linked LiveParanormal interview no longer seems to exist. That is unfortunate but only for the reason that, in order for people to be able to decide for themselves they need to know all that was said. I did hear the interview. I had trouble getting it to DL into a player and the direct feed that started to play was glitchy…..plus a number of times throughout there was a word or phrase that was intelligible, there was no rewind button – could only pause or stop – but I did manage to get it to go back a few times by clicking on the bar, however it'd go back 5 or 10 or even 20mins back & you'd have to relisten to all of it just to get to the one spot again. Long story short I got frustrasted and decided to start over and while pausing umpteen times I transcribed most of it, so I could then read it all.
I can't even tell you what the names of the two hosts are, if it was stated at the start I missed it and during the hour there was no 'this is Bob & Bill [for e.g.] and we're talking to Britt…etc'; the hosts didn't refer to each other by name nor did Britt say their names [save for Greg, heard that one time but IDK who it was referring to, and Drew the moderator fielding questions coming in]. The first 5mins was a mix of quiet mumblings between the hosts or whoever, silence, and the hosts saying 'bear with us 'and/or asking 'Britt to call in'. Honestly it was very amateur and just an odd interview generally. A few times during, it didn't seem like an interview but more like I was listening to 3 guys having a conversation in a bar….I wasn't sure what they were talking about, a host just suddenly started telling a story but in a way as if all who were listening should already have the details and/or know who the people are he was mentioning. Actually at one point even Britt wasn't sure who they were talking about at first, and it didn't seem like they knew her very well either since they didn't get her last name right; the one guy wanted to know if Britt was going to go shooting with her. Weird.
Throughout there were moments that to me ranged from being obtuse & appalling; to weird; immature/childish; arrogant; ignornat; and pretty funny but not in a comedic sense in a laughable one [e.g.; Britt was talking about evidence and how TAPS has never faked anything; challenged all skeptics to prove they faked it; explained why each season TAPS' success rate with experiencing and/or capturing PN activity continued to increase, quoting some stats]. Though to be fair I will also say I did find some of the info Britt provided regarding TAPS and GH to be interesting.
At any rate, if you like I can provide more than just the quoted snippets listed in Anita's blog/article so you all have the full context in which each of those quoted remarks were made? If so - this question is for Stephen and/or the mods - with there being crude words/remarks in some of it, would you prefer that I insert a couple of ** in select words instead of quoting verbatim? I know it's preferred that when we post our own comments, we try to refrain from using profanity or at least keep it to a minimum and use ** in the middle of the word, and I would have no problem with doing so while quoting Britt's remarks.
It would be easier to discuss the controversial parts if everyone knew exactly what was said, and I'm betting you guys might find some of the other remarks/claims that Britt made to be discussion worthy as well. However to post all that I transcribed would make for several long posts and honestly some of it is just not worth repeating, plus I'm not sure that it'd even be ok to do so….I don't want to create any issues for Stephen & the SV site so I'll refrain from even quoting portions of it [per above noted] until I get the green light to do so. I'll share my views on same then.
In the meantime, here's a little overview of what was discussed, the highlights if you will:
- Started with Britt being asked then talking about craw magaw [sp? some new martial arts thing]; he's been taking classes, sort of sounded like it might be one-on-one instruction.
- After the host said it'd be good to have/know when you go on shady investigations, Britt explains there are 3 TAPS teams: home team; West Coast team; show team. Then tells a story about the West Coast team going to an investigation in a shady area – had a little run-in with 3 gang-bangers but was able to do some quick talking and all turned out ok. Claimed that ever since that case he never goes to an investigation unarmed – gets a reaction from hosts – and next came the remarks that's currently being widely debated and commented on…which he allegedly was fired for.
- More talk about going to shady areas, then just silly ramblings about who can run faster and throwing blows and hope that you have the biggest gun. Hosts tells of a domestic dispute occurring at an investigation they went to. Britt then cuts in saying one thing he/Rob teach in their para-class is to not where a lot of jewelery/bling and don't show your religion…goes on to tell another story [West coast team] relating to the latter, team members being chased by the Grandfather [recently arrived from Turkey] who was weilding a sword.
- Host wants to shift things as they have some questions coming in….notes also got some comments regarding Britt's remarks, B things it's b/c he used profanity and says he forgot to note the disclaimer that he is R-rated etc and basically told ppl to deal with it he's not changing for no one. Host quietly mentions it was about an earlier remark Britt made but then let that go saying if it comes up again he'll mention it.
- They ask about Britt/KJ being brought in temporarily to cover for Steve/Tango…Britt talks a while about that. Then about other aspects of the show: scheduling, being on the road, how investigating while doing a TV show is not as easy as people think and why, how a million ppl want to do it but only very few people actually have what it takes to do what they do, etc. Talked about Wright-Patterson case, he apparently was there but no one his footage made the cut….he has no clue about the rumored 'secret' that Kris Williams has just that it'll be announced during the Live Halloween show….talked about the popcorn butter bet thing with Dustin…more about being on the road, made an odd remark regarding paying for a pool he doesn't have [later said the wife has Sanchos - pool guy - when he's on the road, IDK if it was all in jest or what but he wasn't really laughing]….went on to talk about the day job he use to have 'ashpalt foreman', worked 12hrs a day 6 days wk: how that was harder than being away from the family for 4 or 5wks then home a week or two, with about 6wks off during hiatus as then you could spend Q-time with the kids etc.
- They share stories about scary plane experiences – B notes the DT one – and then the hosts say we have to ask the tough question, how do you feel about ppl who have said Jay & Grant fake stuff….Britt goes on for a while with this one, puts a challenge out to all skeptics. Host bashes the SciFake site calling the ppl there idiots – B didn't disagree….talks more about evidence, gets into certain cases a bit, says the show has to be done in an entertaining way and gets into that bit for a while, how all this footage is obtained and has to be widdled down to 45mins, tells ppl [us] to use some common sense, rambles on more about how they don't fake things, reputations on the line etc….then starts into the by season stats [% of active cases] but doesn't include S4 or S5, notes currently it's about 75%, then gets into explaining why that's the case. Britt claims there's only about 148 naysayers but they all make 72 fake IDs each so it looks like much more, & more 'faking/not faking it' talk follows.
- Silly question – if Britt goes shopping with Amy & Kris…he rambles on about A's shoe fetish, asks all who listen to send her shoes [used; men; women; whatever] to the TAPS office; then tells all to twitter her [gives the comment to say]…the 3 little boys giggle away about this for a while, and Britt also went on about how Amy is his fashion consultant, he can't dress himself.
- Next Q was what Britt wanted to be when he was a child, says a cop and this is when the Rodney King remarks were made. After B says same the host just out of the blue starts talking about some Sara woman and asking B if he's going to go shooting with her. Takes a bit before B figures out who Sara is and they get her last name figured out….some other remarks made during this were a tad obtuse IMO. This eventually leads into more gun talk, where Britt goes shooting and then he rambles on about some fantasy he has, then a host starts talking about a camping trip & shooting guns while drinking and idiocy stuff.
- Britt finally decides he should answer some Q's but doesn't wait for one comes up with his own, claiming he gets a lot of messages regarding doors opening/closing on him/KJ….goes on a for bit about that. Host suddenly rambles on about some place B should go to and how it has a door that slams shut etc. Host says about 4 mins left….tells B 'Scotty says he loves you'…then comes B's 'Scotty says Gay is the new twenty' remarks….Host starts looking for any more good questions…says a weird remark or question 'what's the new black'…demons…..then finds a good Q, B's favorite place and which is the most active locale….B goes on about that for a while. Another Q from Scotty, a quick 'yes' reply from Britt & he tells listeners if they want to go to a cheap event he, Amy, Kris will be at 'blah blah' notes a few others [Chip Coffey, Fact or Faked guys] will be there too. And that was about it.
|
|
|
7:17 am October 24, 2010
| Nosfer
| | Rotaredom | |
| Moderator
| posts 2956 |
|
|
No transcripts necessary. For purposes of SV, the main take-away from this is Britt being gone and any ramifications that will have for GH and GHI. This topic has great potential for derailing very easily (as shown over at SciFi and on SciFake) and that's not going to happen here.
|
Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.
|
|
|
1:43 pm October 24, 2010
| Revenant
| | Hopelessly Locked In A "Fear Cage" | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1393 |
|
|
Mugs said: "After the host said it'd be good to have/know when you go on shady investigations, Britt explains there are 3 TAPS teams: home team; West Coast team; show team. Then tells a story about the West Coast team going to an investigation in a shady area – had a little run-in with 3 gang-bangers but was able to do some quick talking and all turned out ok. Claimed that ever since that case he never goes to an investigation unarmed – gets a reaction from hosts – and next came the remarks that's currently being widely debated and commented on…which he allegedly was fired for."
First, a thanks to Mugs for all the information. The links were interesting.
The noted paragraph above highlighted something that really caught my eye. That Britt claimed to "never go to an investigation unarmed." Hmmm, really? I am guessing and hoping that this was just a bit of bravado…a little gamesmanship. I mean, carrying a weapon across state lines and concealing a weapon…those are things that a Federal Marshall or a FBI Agent does…not an "ex-asphalt foreman"/ghost-hunter.
I wonder if this aspect will filter through the paranormal community, especially on the client side. It may be one thing to invite a paranormal investigatory group to your home to look for ghosts…but it is quite another to invite a group that is carrying concealed weapons into your home or place of business.
I also wonder how this will effect current TV shows. I'm guessing each and every show is going to get a visit from their networks HR person and a couple of lawyers explaining how it's not a really great idea to carry weapons with you on investigations. I can just envision the long, long conversations with the lawyers over what constitutes a weapon according to various state law. And I'm sure Ben from FoF and being a former FBI Agent is going to get a special long talking to because you know he probably has a gun or two.
And since we're throwing around legal aspects of ghost-hunting…if ghost-hunters believe that ghosts do exist, and that ghosts constitute "ex-living human beings" and if they determine a place to have an "intelligent haunting"…if one begins to "provoke" the ghosts…could they be arrested for "Assault?" I mean, if you believe that ghosts are real…then you are literally breaking the law by provoking/assaulting them, aren't you? 
|
"Skepticism is not a position, it's a process." -Dr Michael Shermer
|
|
|
11:50 pm October 24, 2010
| Mugs
| | |
| Investigator | posts 30 |
|
|
Nosfer said: No transcripts necessary. For purposes of SV, the main take-away from this is Britt being gone and any ramifications that will have for GH and GHI. This topic has great potential for derailing very easily (as shown over at SciFi and on SciFake) and that's not going to happen here.
Sorry perhaps I should have worded my question differently, please allow me to clarify. I had no intention nor was I asking about the entire transcript, I recognize there is no need for same and as noted previously some of it is not even worth repeating. I was only referring to the 'quoted snippets' in Anita's blog – since those snippets are what drew the initail reaction/response from both Britt and Scotty – and more specifically the one that is currently being debated.
The only reason for offering same is due to the fact that the interview is no longer available and thus those who did not hear it would not know the context in which each of those remarks [quoted snippets] were made. And to be fair, IMO, a couple were taken out of context. For example one of the quotes was: "You take care of your fans? Wow."….which Britt had said after one of the hosts had said 'Yea, sorry we're shifting, wanted to answer some questions too"….so Britt's remark was said in jest in this case. And that's what I meant by saying 'I can provide more than just the quoted snippets', quote a line or two before the remark was made and/or simply note what was being discussed or shared – such as Britt telling the gang-banger story before making the controversial remark - to put the remark into context.
I certainly did not want to start any sort of debate akin to the one going on over at SciFake – if you can even call it a debate – hence refraining from quoting 'the remark' Britt made [one being debated] in my posts. Albeit I haven't read all of their articles and comments on same – not even close – of the ones I have, derailing seems to be par for the course at that site. A more civil discussion can be had on this without going down the SciFake path, and to be honest I didn't for a moment even think that would happen here which is why I thought it'd be ok to share what I did thus far.
At any rate, I didn't mean to upset anyone and I apologize if I did. I will respect the route in which you want this discussion to go.
|
|
|
1:14 am October 25, 2010
| Mugs
| | |
| Investigator | posts 30 |
|
|
As for Britt being gone and what ramifications it will have on GH and GHI. Based on what Britt said in the interview when asked questions regarding the shows, such as: Britt & KJ temporarily replacing Steve/Tango, now that S/T are back will we still be seeing B/KJ on GH; If Britt would like to do GHI; and during one of his longer responses Britt then asked himself a question – least it seemed that way, he was likely reading the question board – about what Kris' [Williams] secret is, and he made a comment about GHA.
I don't think there'll be any big ramifications to speak of as far as GH is concerned. Britt said that so far SyFy had not ordered any more GHA EPs, not a good sign for Stango's show, so he didn't know if there'd be any future need for having temporary fill-ins for S/T on GH. There was still 2 more EPs [at time of the interview] that B/KJ had done which had yet to air but then that's it, they were done. Their gig was only a temporary one. As for KW's secret he claimed to have no bleeping clue, said to watch the Live Halloween show as it will be announced then. Rumor has it she is going to GHI, guess we'll soon find out.
IF they are going to have Adam [GHA winner] join GH on permanent basis, it'd make for an odd number for the core team….unless they intend to have one team of 3 or have him spend all his time manning command [doubt it], it may very well be that he'll either be replacing Kris or filling in for her when she's off filming GHI – IF that rumor turns out to be true. IF it turns out that SyFy does order more GHA EPs, odds are it'd only be 6 at best as before, during same they could always bring KJ back and – a while back now – I noticed a whole slew of new faces were added to the 'TAPS members' page at the their site. Surely some of those individuals would be happy to fill in – if their on the home team they should be able to do so easy enough, no training required – if not even one of the GHA cadets that were in the final three.
Frankly, I'm betting season 7 just might be the last one. Based on some of the locales we've seen this season and in the past, not all cases needed 6 people, at some even 4 would've sufficed. So if need be they could do at least some cases with only 5 [Jay-Grant-Amy-KJ-Adam], plus have a guest investigator or two from their home team or a TAPS Family team or Bruce Tango etc, or as they've done in the past have Joe and/or Barry – when GHI is on hiatus – help out at a few.
As for GHI, obviously there's going to be some fast shuffling – no doubt it's going on as we speak – and I wouldn't be surprised if Pilgrim [if not also Jay/Grant] didn't already have a couple of candidates waiting in the wings in the event things didn't work out with Britt at GHI. The hosts didn't ask Britt if he was doing/going to GHI only if he would like to….he replied: 'Oh [unintelligible] ghosts, travel the world on someone else's dime, hell yea I'm all over that'. Make of it what you will – same with this – someone noted [think it was at SyFy] that apparently Britt had already started filming with GHI when he was terminated, and wondered if they would air those EPs [2 or 3 think it was]. IF that's true it'll be interesting to see if they do air them or not.
And for all we know he was only going to do a certain number - half season say or less – and after same it would be determined if he was going to stay on therein. He has children and albeit he was on the road with GH, globe-trotting is a different ball game than hopping around the U.S. – especially when some of the cases are in your home State or next to it – easier to sneak in a few days with the family and/or get home quickly if need be, not so when you're half way around the world. One of the hosts said Jay & Grant have both tweeted about that, said it's hard to find people because of the travel invloved. Wish I could recall if it was in the spring or summer when I went to the Pilgrim site after reading somewhere that they had a casting call out for GHI, was curious if it was true, it was. So who knows what they were looking for.
Britt also said some things I found interesting – actually confirmed a couple speculations I had - he was talking about GH, the accusations some have made about J&G [TAPS] faking evidence; cameramen having to go back to get the B-roll [cut-away shots he called it] shots of things they had done earlier; editing down of all the footage and how they have to tell the story and make it entertaining etc. He claimed the reason that TAPS' positive rating for activity [percentage] has gone up every season is due to the fact that:
- They get hundreds of emails every week about active locations they should investigate, they can then get online & contact TAPS Family group teams and/or other locale teams in that area and ask them if they have been there, if so what did they get [activity/evidence wise]….said, quote: "We have a bit*h'n filter system set up that we know where these places are, they've already been pre-screened". Added they do some cold cases too but there's always stories with them.
- They have [quote] 'A big ass budget'.
- And [quote] 'Not only that, we have a production company and producers that, that research these locations and they've been doing that for seven years – we're in our 7th season – they've gotten really good at being able to research a location, listen to the stories and figure out what's going to work and what isn't going to work.'
How any of that equates into the locales being active [extremely often enough] the night that TAPS is there is beyond me, it isn't as if they can flip a switch or say okay ghosts, ready, 'action'. I'm sure the pre-screening, talking to locale teams [when able], Pilgrim doing all the research and deciding which locales to do is done with GHI as well. During this whole decision process you'd think they'd take into account the possibility that at any point and time they could be down one or even two cast/team members….be it an emergency & they had to go home; they quit or got fired; become ill. Same goes for the crew, so there has to be back up systems in place for everything from locales to equipment to crew and cast members. IMHO
|
|
|
7:29 am October 25, 2010
| Nosfer
| | Rotaredom | |
| Moderator
| posts 2956 |
|
|
Mugs said:
Sorry perhaps I should have worded my question differently, please allow me to clarify. I had no intention nor was I asking about the entire transcript, I recognize there is no need for same and as noted previously some of it is not even worth repeating. I was only referring to the 'quoted snippets' in Anita's blog – since those snippets are what drew the initail reaction/response from both Britt and Scotty – and more specifically the one that is currently being debated.
The only reason for offering same is due to the fact that the interview is no longer available and thus those who did not hear it would not know the context in which each of those remarks [quoted snippets] were made. And to be fair, IMO, a couple were taken out of context. For example one of the quotes was: "You take care of your fans? Wow."….which Britt had said after one of the hosts had said 'Yea, sorry we're shifting, wanted to answer some questions too"….so Britt's remark was said in jest in this case. And that's what I meant by saying 'I can provide more than just the quoted snippets', quote a line or two before the remark was made and/or simply note what was being discussed or shared – such as Britt telling the gang-banger story before making the controversial remark - to put the remark into context.
No, still not necessary. I'll repeat. We are not going to get into the remarks and reasoning behind the firing or whether it was justified or not, etc. Placing said quotes out there and discussing them (which is not relevant here) will draw in others who find them via search and we'll see things go the route of other threads here that have had to be locked.
Quotes from interviews that detail particular aspects of CASES or INVESTIGATIONS or quotes that are relevant to those investigations. No problem. Debating First (or Second) Amendment rights (Especially since the former DOES NOT APPLY in this case) or any of the other topics that Anita's blog title describes…no. If people wish to discuss that sort of thing, there are more appropriate venues.
|
Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.
|
|