The Reality of Being a Viewer of Paranormal Shows On Television
Ghost/Paranormal
Monday 23rd, October 2023
Since Most Haunted hit our television screens way back in 2002 it was the kick starter for a whole new generation of people to build a community and following for paranormal investigation.
When you as a viewer sit down to watch a paranormal show you could go into it with the nervous hope that this will be the show or episode that you might witness something profound, or that you consider hard proof of the paranormal, or you could be sitting down for some entertainment with some friends, or even sitting down as a paranormal investigator to see what other teams are doing on their investigations.
With all these shows that are on television the crew includes a mix of dedicated paranormal investigators that might have ran investigations prior to their television debut. The crew also might have researchers, writers, electrical/lighting experts, maybe some crew members with experience in audio or video (engineers), producers, health and safety, location manager, makeup, camera operators as well as a whole host of other roles and responsibilities depending on how big or small the production crew being used is.
Like any show that is seen on television, countless hours go into making a 30, 45, 60 minute show and like any paranormal investigator or any investigator for that matter, they know how much work is done in the background to organise a location, setup, tear down, and review all audio and video from an investigation. It takes a lot of time and personal sacrifice.
It's unfortunately inevitable that these shows will be picked apart and questioned when only a fraction of an investigation is presented, it's like when you were in school, the teacher always said when doing math you had to show your work. It's a very similar concept, by just asserting this happened in front of a camera and that there was no one else around at the time, or that the batteries died 'suddenly' but were fully charged, without presenting supporting evidence it will only lead to questions being asked, and the teacher believing that you were being dishonest and not able to figure out the sum in your head.
For any individual working on these shows, you also have to remember the viewers can only go on what they see or hear. Just because you were there during all the filming doesn't make much, if any of a difference if the viewer can only see the 30 minutes of edited footage through the narrow view of a camera.
It's not always a case that individuals are being critical of a particular show on television but more a case that in a 30 minute show there were ten or fifteen paranormal events which from a viewers perspective rings alarm bells as anyone that's been on a paranormal investigation knows that you can go hours on an investigation without anything or even nights without any events taking place.
Perception plays a huge part in all paranormal shows on television, not even with paranormal shows but main stream news as well, it's been increasingly hard as a viewer to understand who is doing what and who is telling the truth in all the conflicts we have seen in recent times. We all hear different stories from the individuals on the ground in the various locations contradicting each other based on their own personal experiences and perceptions of what is happening around them.
We're sure that the majority of investigators we see on television got into paranormal investigation for the sole reason of finding out the truth, but this is also (unfortunately) not always the case. We won't name names but anyone that has kept up on the paranormal shows over the years will know that there have been a few individuals that over the years have for whatever reason made stories up or events up. We're not hear to judge the reasons as to why they did these things but merely to point out that these individuals muddy the waters for every legitimate investigator out there trying to get answers and present their evidence.
Wrapping up on this, without constructive criticism and picking apart what we as viewers see on paranormal shows, not just on television but on social media and streaming sites. How are these experts on television going to be kept in check and improve on how they investigate or improve the techniques and technology they use.
Any review of a paranormal show should follow similar processes as mainstream research, for example, science papers are peer-reviewed, debating on techniques used for investigation purposes, questioning technology used, what evidence is there to backup or discredit a method or technology used and so on.
Just being on television should not remove an investigator from critique or review, if anything there should be more as they are the small few that are out in the public eye pushing a message that reverberates all the way from the top with huge teams, with large social media presences, down to the lone investigator working on their own in the shadows.
- Albert Einstein
When you as a viewer sit down to watch a paranormal show you could go into it with the nervous hope that this will be the show or episode that you might witness something profound, or that you consider hard proof of the paranormal, or you could be sitting down for some entertainment with some friends, or even sitting down as a paranormal investigator to see what other teams are doing on their investigations.
With all these shows that are on television the crew includes a mix of dedicated paranormal investigators that might have ran investigations prior to their television debut. The crew also might have researchers, writers, electrical/lighting experts, maybe some crew members with experience in audio or video (engineers), producers, health and safety, location manager, makeup, camera operators as well as a whole host of other roles and responsibilities depending on how big or small the production crew being used is.
Like any show that is seen on television, countless hours go into making a 30, 45, 60 minute show and like any paranormal investigator or any investigator for that matter, they know how much work is done in the background to organise a location, setup, tear down, and review all audio and video from an investigation. It takes a lot of time and personal sacrifice.
It's unfortunately inevitable that these shows will be picked apart and questioned when only a fraction of an investigation is presented, it's like when you were in school, the teacher always said when doing math you had to show your work. It's a very similar concept, by just asserting this happened in front of a camera and that there was no one else around at the time, or that the batteries died 'suddenly' but were fully charged, without presenting supporting evidence it will only lead to questions being asked, and the teacher believing that you were being dishonest and not able to figure out the sum in your head.
For any individual working on these shows, you also have to remember the viewers can only go on what they see or hear. Just because you were there during all the filming doesn't make much, if any of a difference if the viewer can only see the 30 minutes of edited footage through the narrow view of a camera.
It's not always a case that individuals are being critical of a particular show on television but more a case that in a 30 minute show there were ten or fifteen paranormal events which from a viewers perspective rings alarm bells as anyone that's been on a paranormal investigation knows that you can go hours on an investigation without anything or even nights without any events taking place.
Perception plays a huge part in all paranormal shows on television, not even with paranormal shows but main stream news as well, it's been increasingly hard as a viewer to understand who is doing what and who is telling the truth in all the conflicts we have seen in recent times. We all hear different stories from the individuals on the ground in the various locations contradicting each other based on their own personal experiences and perceptions of what is happening around them.
We're sure that the majority of investigators we see on television got into paranormal investigation for the sole reason of finding out the truth, but this is also (unfortunately) not always the case. We won't name names but anyone that has kept up on the paranormal shows over the years will know that there have been a few individuals that over the years have for whatever reason made stories up or events up. We're not hear to judge the reasons as to why they did these things but merely to point out that these individuals muddy the waters for every legitimate investigator out there trying to get answers and present their evidence.
Wrapping up on this, without constructive criticism and picking apart what we as viewers see on paranormal shows, not just on television but on social media and streaming sites. How are these experts on television going to be kept in check and improve on how they investigate or improve the techniques and technology they use.
Any review of a paranormal show should follow similar processes as mainstream research, for example, science papers are peer-reviewed, debating on techniques used for investigation purposes, questioning technology used, what evidence is there to backup or discredit a method or technology used and so on.
Just being on television should not remove an investigator from critique or review, if anything there should be more as they are the small few that are out in the public eye pushing a message that reverberates all the way from the top with huge teams, with large social media presences, down to the lone investigator working on their own in the shadows.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning.
- Albert Einstein
