Comments on: The Real Ghost Story http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/ The official blog of the Skeptologists Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:38:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Scotty B http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-664 Scotty B Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:26:01 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-664 I did a search for "Novella" on the Register Citizen site and found the article Steve referred to: http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2005/10/31/front%20page/15483270.txt I did a search for “Novella” on the Register Citizen site and found the article Steve referred to:
http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2005/10/31/front%20page/15483270.txt

]]> By: Erick http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-368 Erick Fri, 31 Oct 2008 23:43:56 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-368 CNN.com ran a story on ghost hunters today without even the usual token level of science. http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/10/31/boo/index.html CNN.com ran a story on ghost hunters today without even the usual token level of science.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/10/31/boo/index.html

]]> By: Bill http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-358 Bill Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:40:24 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-358 Our local newspaper's online edition has the requisite front-page story on one of our local paranormal research groups (who devoutly do NOT want to be called 'ghosthunters') This group is led by a woman named Christy Necaise. Here's one of her quotes in the article: "I'm not doing this to prove this is real," Necaise added. "I already believe it is." I'd like a double order of confirmation bias, please, waiter. Link to the full article. Registration is required, but you're only required to give general demographic information. And if you want to mess with their marketing a bit, you can lie. :) http://www.azcentral.com/community/surprise/articles/2008/10/31/20081031gl-nwvparanormal1031.html Our local newspaper’s online edition has the requisite front-page story on one of our local paranormal research groups (who devoutly do NOT want to be called ‘ghosthunters’)

This group is led by a woman named Christy Necaise. Here’s one of her quotes in the article:

“I’m not doing this to prove this is real,” Necaise added. “I already believe it is.”

I’d like a double order of confirmation bias, please, waiter.

Link to the full article. Registration is required, but you’re only required to give general demographic information. And if you want to mess with their marketing a bit, you can lie. :)

http://www.azcentral.com/community/surprise/articles/2008/10/31/20081031gl-nwvparanormal1031.html

]]> By: rdriley http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-255 rdriley Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:41:02 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-255 As a trained journalist, I almost feel obligated to comment on the question "has the quality of journalism dipped?" Also, I just like to spread my opinion about things around the internet. Makes me feel smart. I think I'd have to give a qualified "yes." I'm not sure the quality of reporting has changed substantively, but the level of writing surely has. On the subject of reporting, just consider how BAD journalism was in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. William Randolph Hearst pretty much set the standard for bad journalism. As I said in a comment on Dr. Novella's own blog, the one thing that really negatively affects modern journalism is the all-encompassing drive for "balance." That means no objective attempt at truth-telling. It means journalists give equal time to cranks, no matter how crazy their ideas are. I don't believe the problem with "fluff" pieces as described in the post is anything even remotely new. It's a phenomenon that's existed for decades. It is also, sadly enough, the only area outside the sports pages where balance isn't worshipped. A light, entertaining story on Jesus toast needs no opposing viewpoint, in the eyes of editors. As a trained journalist, I almost feel obligated to comment on the question “has the quality of journalism dipped?” Also, I just like to spread my opinion about things around the internet. Makes me feel smart.

I think I’d have to give a qualified “yes.” I’m not sure the quality of reporting has changed substantively, but the level of writing surely has.

On the subject of reporting, just consider how BAD journalism was in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. William Randolph Hearst pretty much set the standard for bad journalism.

As I said in a comment on Dr. Novella’s own blog, the one thing that really negatively affects modern journalism is the all-encompassing drive for “balance.” That means no objective attempt at truth-telling. It means journalists give equal time to cranks, no matter how crazy their ideas are.

I don’t believe the problem with “fluff” pieces as described in the post is anything even remotely new. It’s a phenomenon that’s existed for decades. It is also, sadly enough, the only area outside the sports pages where balance isn’t worshipped. A light, entertaining story on Jesus toast needs no opposing viewpoint, in the eyes of editors.

]]> By: Sarah http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-150 Sarah Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:44:05 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-150 Also, unfortunately, my paper just switched over to a new web site carrier today at 5 p.m. and the archives are not fully implemented yet. Here is a link to the same article in Google's cache: http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:7knqNM96G0sJ:www.registercitizen.com/site/news.cfm%3Fnewsid%3D15483270%26BRD%3D1652%26PAG%3D461%26dept_id%3D12530%26rfi%3D6+skeptical+society+novella+register+citizen&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us Also, unfortunately, my paper just switched over to a new web site carrier today at 5 p.m. and the archives are not fully implemented yet.

Here is a link to the same article in Google’s cache:

http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:7knqNM96G0sJ:www.registercitizen.com/site/news.cfm%3Fnewsid%3D15483270%26BRD%3D1652%26PAG%3D461%26dept_id%3D12530%26rfi%3D6+skeptical+society+novella+register+citizen&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

]]> By: Sarah http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-136 Sarah Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:42:39 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-136 Yay! How excited am I that that good article you link to was published in the newspaper I work for? :) I am a devoted listener to the SGU and Skeptoid, and I try to bring skepticism to the newsroom as much as I can (they did an article about some guy's crazy chemtrails meeting on one of my days off, though...) We got a press release from a local ghost society, wanting us to go on an investigation with them, and I said "Not unless I can call my skeptic guys too!" :) Yay! How excited am I that that good article you link to was published in the newspaper I work for? :)

I am a devoted listener to the SGU and Skeptoid, and I try to bring skepticism to the newsroom as much as I can (they did an article about some guy’s crazy chemtrails meeting on one of my days off, though…) We got a press release from a local ghost society, wanting us to go on an investigation with them, and I said “Not unless I can call my skeptic guys too!” :)

]]> By: Pete http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-124 Pete Tue, 28 Oct 2008 17:17:55 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-124 First have to say just listened to the latest Skeptics Guide and found out about the website. Looks like there goes all my free time. I'm pretty excited you teamed up with Brian Dunning, I love listening to that guy. Hope this site takes off! First have to say just listened to the latest Skeptics Guide and found out about the website. Looks like there goes all my free time. I’m pretty excited you teamed up with Brian Dunning, I love listening to that guy. Hope this site takes off!

]]> By: Cambias http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-119 Cambias Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:31:22 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-119 Dr. T, I must object -- it's not that "Joe and Jane Averageviewer" are idiots -- it's that the media professionals _assume_ Joe and Jane are idiots. Every few years some very smart, very sophisticated show or movie is a surprise success, but nobody ever seems to learn the lesson that the audiences _like_ material which engages their intelligence. Look at how popular _Mythbusters_ is, or the ongoing boom in really excellent nonfiction books, or the success of shows like _Lost_, which constantly teases the viewer with complex mysteries. "Joe and Jane" aren't stupid, but too many stupid people in media use that as an excuse for creating mediocre material. Dr. T, I must object — it’s not that “Joe and Jane Averageviewer” are idiots — it’s that the media professionals _assume_ Joe and Jane are idiots. Every few years some very smart, very sophisticated show or movie is a surprise success, but nobody ever seems to learn the lesson that the audiences _like_ material which engages their intelligence. Look at how popular _Mythbusters_ is, or the ongoing boom in really excellent nonfiction books, or the success of shows like _Lost_, which constantly teases the viewer with complex mysteries. “Joe and Jane” aren’t stupid, but too many stupid people in media use that as an excuse for creating mediocre material.

]]> By: Devil's Advocate http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-116 Devil's Advocate Tue, 28 Oct 2008 14:19:58 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-116 YES, the quality of journalism has dipped. It began with the excellent work of Woodward & Bernstein who outed Nixon & Watergate, making them media stars. This told the other 100,000 journalists that the pathway to fame and fortune lie in investigative journalism. This lead to the 'journalist' becoming another media star, another personality in the 'news', and excesses occurred - faked stories, faked witnesses, etc. Instead of reporting on the news, they came to see themselves as being the news. Watch any TV 'news' outlet cover a story today. They rarely interview anyone actually involved - that would require time and money expenditures. Instead they interview each other about how they feel about the story, or hire someone to act as their special authority in the story area, someone who also had nothing to do with it. Too many journalists do what woos and pseudoscientists do - they first pick their opinion or conclusion on a given issue, then 'report' only that data which supports it: biased data selection. Journalism too often 'reports' not the full facts, but those which justify their opinions. The Associated Press recently announced they would no longer require objectivity from their reporters, even on mundane stories, that every AP writer is now allowed to write his/her opinions into the story, all without labeling the work as 'opinion' or 'editorial'. YES, the quality of journalism has dipped. It began with the excellent work of Woodward & Bernstein who outed Nixon & Watergate, making them media stars. This told the other 100,000 journalists that the pathway to fame and fortune lie in investigative journalism. This lead to the ‘journalist’ becoming another media star, another personality in the ‘news’, and excesses occurred – faked stories, faked witnesses, etc. Instead of reporting on the news, they came to see themselves as being the news. Watch any TV ‘news’ outlet cover a story today. They rarely interview anyone actually involved – that would require time and money expenditures. Instead they interview each other about how they feel about the story, or hire someone to act as their special authority in the story area, someone who also had nothing to do with it. Too many journalists do what woos and pseudoscientists do – they first pick their opinion or conclusion on a given issue, then ‘report’ only that data which supports it: biased data selection. Journalism too often ‘reports’ not the full facts, but those which justify their opinions. The Associated Press recently announced they would no longer require objectivity from their reporters, even on mundane stories, that every AP writer is now allowed to write his/her opinions into the story, all without labeling the work as ‘opinion’ or ‘editorial’.

]]> By: Tom Hand http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/10/27/the-real-ghost-story/#comment-109 Tom Hand Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:18:31 +0000 http://skepticblog.org/?p=176#comment-109 Has the quality of journalism really dipped? I understand the point; but isn't it simply that there's far more "journalism" with the internet and cable news, so the same percentage of trash means a higher number of bad articles? I know there have been studies showing negative trends but do they compare through historical numbers and understanding of the time? It's a complex topic, obviously; and certainly no reason to let up on journalists who produce garbage for ratings rather than facts for news. Has the quality of journalism really dipped? I understand the point; but isn’t it simply that there’s far more “journalism” with the internet and cable news, so the same percentage of trash means a higher number of bad articles? I know there have been studies showing negative trends but do they compare through historical numbers and understanding of the time? It’s a complex topic, obviously; and certainly no reason to let up on journalists who produce garbage for ratings rather than facts for news.

]]>