| User | Post |
|
3:29 pm February 19, 2009
| andiamo
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
First of all, great site you have here.
I have one questions, and please excuse me if it's redundant and/or silly:
If these guys are purposely out to decieve and the Sci-Fi channel is aware of this, would they have to inform the viewers of this? I know it's silly, but when watching other shows, i.e. lost tapes on animal planet, they make it very clear that what they are showing are re-enactments based upon the idea that *insert various cryptid* exists, essentially they're saying, "the following is fake" (which is fine…at least they're honest). Also, I watch Man vs. Wild on Discovery…not sure if anyone is familiar but it's based on the premisse that a guy goes out into the woods and survives for 5 or so days all by himself w/ no outside help. To make a long story short, the guy was busted sleeping in a hotel or something and the gig was up. Now everytime I watch the show, Discovery Channel makes it very clear that the host, does in fact recieve help from his crew and that he's is purposely placed in situations to show the viewers how to respond accordingly (as opposed to being all by himself).
It just seems to me that a network has an obligation to it's viewers?!?! If that wasn't the case why did Discovery Channel all of a sudden disclose this info after they were exposed? Why does Animal Planet very blatantly tell it's viewers that their show is totally made up (thust causing no one to watch…LOL)? If GH and Sci-Fi were out to decieve don't they have to inform the viewer or am i totally off base? Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
4:12 pm February 19, 2009
| dr_peter_venkman
| | Rochester, NY | |
| Investigator | posts 99 |
|
|
First of all welcome. Glad to have you.
I'm not a lawyer but it seems to me that there isn't any legal obligation for SciFi to broadcast a disclaimer. After all, they're just putting the "Fi" in SciFi. That being said, I agree that taken in the context of the other shows and channels you mentioned it does seem odd that they don't have some sort of statement referring to the authenticity of the content.
|
Hee hee hee! "Get her!" That was your whole plan, huh, "get her." Very scientific.
|
|
|
5:45 pm February 19, 2009
| andiamo
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
dr_peter_venkman said:
First of all welcome. Glad to have you.
I'm not a lawyer but it seems to me that there isn't any legal obligation for SciFi to broadcast a disclaimer. After all, they're just putting the "Fi" in SciFi. That being said, I agree that taken in the context of the other shows and channels you mentioned it does seem odd that they don't have some sort of statement referring to the authenticity of the content.
Thanks dude.
|
|
|
5:48 pm February 19, 2009
| blinddog
| | Special Agent Zombie Elimination Agency | |
| Moderator
| posts 857 |
|
|
andiamo,
They do not have to issue a disclaimer because basically no one has factually proved that ghosts exist.
The show is listed as a docudrama( a classification that covers a multitude of sins).
They just dangle the bait in front of you and see if you'll bite.
|
Double tap to the head. Don't become Undead.
|
|
|
8:33 pm February 19, 2009
| andiamo
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
blinddog50 said:
andiamo,
They do not have to issue a disclaimer because basically no one has factually proved that ghosts exist.
The show is listed as a docudrama( a classification that covers a multitude of sins).
I hear what your saying. I'm just thinking, what if Sci-fi has factual proof that TAPS is faking evidence…can they still pass it off as "real"?
This is what I found when I searched docudrama (from wiki). Anyhow, thanks for the response.
A docudrama is a dramatization of actual historical events. As a neologism, the term is often confused with docufiction.
|
|
|
9:47 pm February 19, 2009
| Oubliette
| | Igloo in NJ | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 574 |
|
|
IMO, SciFi knows very well that things are being faked. What counts are the ratings.
Docufiction sounds more like the actual description of GH!
Didn't Most Haunted wiggle out of a bit of scandal by putting up a disclaimer labeling the show as "entertainment"? It's a broad term that covers most of the shows on TV.
|
If 50 million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
Anatole France
|
|
|
2:28 am February 20, 2009
| Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Hey Andiamo!
I think you may have explained something that's puzzled me a bit. OK, so I think that at least one or two people on Ghost Hunters are pulling hoaxes. If I can figure it out from watching at home, then the editor, who has to watch these clips and more over and over, must also know, and so must everyone else. So why not insert an impossible-to-explain spectre in post-production?
One answer might be plausible deniability. If Pilgrim and Sci-Fi can claim that they weren't in on it, or took no active part, then they're in the clear, and they don't need to run a disclaimer.
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
|
6:30 am February 20, 2009
| Oubliette
| | Igloo in NJ | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 574 |
|
|
Hmmm..anybody know any lawyers, esp. any who service the entertainment industry? These are excellent questions.
|
If 50 million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
Anatole France
|
|
|
7:17 am February 20, 2009
| Wes
| | Spaulding Inn, Room 38 | |
| Investigator | posts 142 |
|
|
This question just came up in another thread … there's no law that requires producers, networks, etc. to precisely identify something that's fictional, dramatized, edited, etc. etc. There is, however, the general custom in the industry to identify reality from pure dramatization. That custom, however, has become extremely blurred with the rise of so many "reality" shows and producers of such content. The notation that something is "real" or "based on actual events" adds a level of drama that producers covet, so they use the term freely. The only check on such dubious labelling is bad publicity and a potential lawsuit (probably doomed to failure) from someone claiming fraud.
(FYI, I'm not a lawyer, but have been involved in media law for 20 years).
|
"The truth shall bear all light."
|
|
|
8:11 am February 20, 2009
| andiamo
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
Thanks for the responses everyone.
I'm inclinded to agree with Oubliette, the show comes across more as a docufiction but I guess without actual proof who's to say for sure.
|
|
|
8:21 am February 20, 2009
| Wes
| | Spaulding Inn, Room 38 | |
| Investigator | posts 142 |
|
|
To expound: there's no doubt that scenes are staged, re-created or set up — for example in this week's GHI we had Robb calling J&G with a plumbing question — and there just happened to be a camera crew with them as they sat in their Roto Rooter van awaiting a call from Europe!!?? The real question is of course if evidence is being faked with Pilgrim's knowledge. If it is, I doubt they'd ever admit it, not because they'd face legal consequences but because it could hurt the ratings.
|
"The truth shall bear all light."
|
|
|
9:00 am February 20, 2009
| Learjet
| | Australia | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1122 |
|
|
Might make for a few stoning sessions from angry ex fans too. So no, it's not something they could ever admit to and show their face in public again.
|
|
|
|
|
9:48 pm September 27, 2009
| bigkim100
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 7 |
|
|
Ok, so lets just say that the Sci-Fi Channel is actually KNOWIINGLY perpetrating a hoax….who exactly are you going to report this to….that gives a crap. FCC in the States CRTC in Canada????….dont exactly stay up at night waiting for someone to be arrested on this.
|
|
|
|
|
9:39 pm September 28, 2009
| Diogenes
| | NJ | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 18 |
|
|
It's a TV show. SyFy is a TV network. It's in the business to make money. Ratings on GH are high. SyFy can charge sponsers more for airtime. They make money. they are happy. It's not about investigations, it's about money. To Call the stars investigators is to call Ronald McDonaid a gourmet chef.
|
The Greatest Emotion Man Can Experience is the Mysterious. It stands at the Door of True Science. He that knows it not, No longer can dream, no longer can wonder, is as good as dead and his eyes are dull – Einstein
|
|
|
12:31 am September 29, 2009
| Revenant
| | Hopelessly Locked In A "Fear Cage" | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1393 |
|
|
Diogenes said:
To Call the stars investigators is to call Ronald McDonaid a gourmet chef.
Isn't Ronald McDonald on the new season of "Top Chef?" I could have sworn I saw him. Hmmm…on second thought, I might be thinking of The Hamburglar…
And speaking of that, wasn't The Hamburglar always running around McDonaldland back in the '80's with an EMF meter and claiming that he just saw a shadow? A true pioneer he was…
|
"Skepticism is not a position, it's a process." -Dr Michael Shermer
|
|
|
12:41 am September 29, 2009
| Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Hmm… is that what "robble robble" means?
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
|
12:55 am September 29, 2009
| Revenant
| | Hopelessly Locked In A "Fear Cage" | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1393 |
|
|
Stephen said:
Hmm… is that what "robble robble" means?
No, I think that translates into "I think I feel a cold spot near the ice cream dispenser."
|
"Skepticism is not a position, it's a process." -Dr Michael Shermer
|
|
|
11:42 am September 29, 2009
| Angelayo1970
| | Sysematically breaking all my new year's resolutions | |
| Investigator | posts 162 |
|
|
You're both wrong…Hamburglar is McDonaldland's answer to Derek Acorah. "Robble robble" is obviously him channeling a spirit.
|
"In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." -Galileo Galilei
|
|