I think it reasonable to expect that the paranormal shows, due more to time constraints filming HAVE to exaggerate some things cos it is plainly unreasonable to just go out and necessarily capture what is known to be rare phenomena!
So what are the programme directors/makers to do? To keep things even a little interesting they have no option but to edit in a certain way and to ramp up any events, no matter how small.
They really are stuck in a hard place, the makers (in the TAPS style). As said above, the shows that re-create cases from first-hand witness interviews, give us something not preaching to be real or fake, just like testimony in court - you choose to believe it or not.
I've seen some shows I thought were pretty good in UFO hunters and Chasing UFOs. Not many but some were pretty good IMO.
So what are the programme directors/makers to do? To keep things even a little interesting they have no option but to edit in a certain way and to ramp up any events, no matter how small.
They really are stuck in a hard place, the makers (in the TAPS style). As said above, the shows that re-create cases from first-hand witness interviews, give us something not preaching to be real or fake, just like testimony in court - you choose to believe it or not.
I've seen some shows I thought were pretty good in UFO hunters and Chasing UFOs. Not many but some were pretty good IMO.