Truth Discovery vs. Entertaining the Masses

[Bobb999]

I enjoyed the portion of the barroom discussion from the April 27/08 podcast sparked by radio host Rob Simone suggesting it wasn't his job to sort out his charlatan guests from those with credibility. He's happy just to put the stories out there and let the audience decide for themselves.

Gene and David have a different view. I agree that charlatans and hoaxers don't deserve an unchallenged platform to further spread their noxious wares.They only serve to help discredit the field.

Yet I can see that doing a show with Billy Meir's spokesman could potentially be a public service IF hosts assembled and presented the compelling evidence suggesting Meier's a liar.
Then, the audience, instead of being hoodwinked by the Meier story, would come away harbouring healthy reservations, skepticism, or disbelief.
That could be a helpful, educational show. It's when false claims that already have widespread dissemination are allowed to be presented uncontested and uncriticized, that the audience is ill served.

I fear Simone's attitude isn't dissimilar to Art Bell's and C2C's.
I recall a few quotes from Art suggesting he and Simone are of the same school of thought.
Art's said "It's all about ratings". And numerous times he said he knew a lot of the material his guests present is B.S. and should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm afraid Art's approach, just like Simone's, typically, was always to play along with guests purveying obvious B.S., instead of challenging it.

I notice George Noory continues this tradition on C2C by having on some discredited charlatans repeatedly , presumably because, although they may be pathological liars, "they give good radio"!

One regular C2C guest in particular, whose first name is Sean and whose initials are S.D.M. comes to mind. If you do a google search on the guy, you'll find careful research into his claims disproving claim after claim he's made about his personal history, education, etc.

It's jaw dropping to read the evidence revealing this guy's "history" to be mostly tall tales! I was disgusted with him and C2C when I learned the facts. Yet C2C continues to have this guest on regularly, unchallenged, happily allowing him to continue purveying his misinformation.
Why? It must be 'cause he's got a good radio voice, has the gift of the gab, and is good for ratings...So why worry about the fact half of what he says is deliberate B.S.! What does C2C care?

That's a shameful attitude to take by C2C, Simone, and whoever else does it.
I applaud theparacast for taking the responsible view that known charlatans should not be provided an uncriticized soapbox just 'cause they might be "entertaining" guests, good for ratings.

 

[EERIE]

I don't think it's a crime to have fun and entertain while searching for answers, but I'm in total agreement with having some sort of 'filter' to keep the scam artists and such away. That's a bit irresponsible IMO.

/dk

 

[ArizonaWill]

I agree that Art Bell wanted it both ways, or to use a trite old saying "to have his cake and eat it too". He would claim (if criticized for promoting frauds by their repeated appearance on C2C) that he was merely providing entertainment. But then at other times, he would set himself up as some sort of nocturnal search for Truth (with a capital "T"). In fact, I often read on the various forums once devoted to Art Bell that listeners thought of him as providing them with the truth that they could not get via other venues. So Art Bell certainly played it both ways to maximize his audience. That was always the goal - big ratings and more radio stations joining on to the Art Bell Train. So in the end, it was all about money, wasn't it?

The Paracast is relatively unique in that the hosts are both experts on ufo history and community. David and Jeff are experiencers at different levels. Finding out the truth is important to them, and they have little patience for fools and frauds. This is so shockingly new to me (and I listened to C2C since 1995 with the same intent, being quite naive about Art Bell's motives for several years). I find the Paracast an amazing program because of the intent and history of the hosts. Gene has had decades of experience with ufology and knows or has known most of the big names since the 1960's. They also both have a talent for carrying on a conversation with a guest, rather than going down a laundry list of questions (which is George Noory's only skill).

There's nothing we can really do to change "for profit" radio that pushes whatever the public will swallow, even if it is psychologically toxic at some level. Hopefully, the Paracast (which seems to be diligently seeking radio network affiliation and outlets) will not succumb to the price of fame, if they get it.

Time will tell.