posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 02:02 PM
Well, what you say is true, it's entirely possible for the show's results to be fudged in favor of salable results. However, I've also seen a
number of them where there was absolutely nothing interesting going on, just rods and orbs, both of which are most likely nothing more than digital
camera problems and flying insects.
However, I wouldn't call it reality TV. I look at it more as an ongoing pseudoscience testing documentary. The guys in the show all have day-jobs
(except for the one who became unemployed), so obviously the show doesn't make that much money. They spend almost as much time debunking their
results as they do gathering information, and they face the people head-on, instead of remaining safely in the studio. The ability for a show and
it's staff to say "Oh, well, no we were wrong about this place, there's really nothing too unusual going on" speaks volumes more for credibility
than a basso narrarator giving the standard "We may never know what really happened..." speech.
I also tend to judge these types of shows (including the UFO ones) by the amount of garbage filler they use. You know, the scenes from horror movies,
the cheesy reinactments, the spinning spiral, the flash to negative... all of these are worthless garbage filler to establish mood and make something
seem more spooky than it actually is.
Ghost Hunters is one of the few shows I've found that rarely uses garbage filler. Proof Positive is another one, though I only have one or two
episodes to go by. Unsolved Mysteries, "...Most Haunted Places", and other such shows, conversely, consist almost entirely of garbage filler.
So, while it's true, it could all be entirely bunk, I do tend to give it more credit than most shows.