My belt is buckled and my tin foil hat has a fresh coating of lemony Pledge.
To my knowledge, there is no hands-on government-imposed censorship of the mainstream media concerning UFO/paranormal topics. I realize that a lot of
people suspect this to be the case, but it's not true as far as I can tell--not overtly, anyway. No one came to our TV station and warned us to stay
away from anymore stories about Lazar, 51, and UFOs. The decision to cover this was ours alone, although we certainly did catch a lot of grief over
it---and still do.
Basically, it boils down to credibility and verification. Most UFO tales are pretty wild and cannot be proven to a high degree of certainty, if at
all. The proponents are often troubled people, true believers, overly zealous, and lacking in anything that comes close to solid evidence or info.
Dan Burisch comes to mind.
For a reporter, the professional risks are very real. I know this as well or better than any MSM reporter in the country, and I'm not boasting by
any means. There is never a shortage of news stories to pursue, not in this town anyway, so if a journalist has a choice between covering an
interesting or important story that does not carry the same kind of potential stigma, or jumping into the deep end of the UFO pool, it's not a tough
choice. The grief doesn't come from the government---not directly anyway. Nor does it come from the general public, since there is still a high level
of interest among regular folks. Instead, it comes from fellow journalists. For some reason, reporters, broadcasters, and columnists who have never
covered the topic are anxious to heap scorn and ridicule on any of their colleagues who DO give it some attention. That's been my experience, anyway.
There is an arugment to be made that this is not entirely accidental. We know about the recommendations of the CIA's Robertson panel back in the
early 50's. The panel suggested that a debunking program be initiated to strip UFOs of their aura of mystery. The so-called 'laughter curtain' or
ridicule factor was born at that moment and continues to this day. People who see UFOs or take them seriously must be nuts. It just so happens that a
heck of a lot of them are nuts to begin with, which makes it all that much easier to dismiss the subject. UFO proponents who make outlandish claims
are eager if unwitting participants in this effort. For a reporter, there is nothing but risk in covering UFOs. What journalist wants to cover the
same story as the Weekly World News? No one ever landed a network job or big city TV contract because they broke a UFO story. An opposite result is
far more likely.
One other factor is that there is a staggering learning curve when it cmes to UFOs. You can't just run a Google search and get a handle on the field.
It's too big and too complicated. It takes a lot of time. For most reporters, it is far easier to tackle something else.

