It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFO media liaison/watchdog organization desperately needed

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 06:54 PM
link   
It sure would be nice if somebody with a bit of spare time and money (I disqualify myself) could create a good non-profit UFO information clearinghouse, which could supply documentary producers and reporters with information and resources about UFOs that are as accurate as possible.

Additionally, it can expose and mock news broadcasts or postings that just can't resist tossing in a disparaging comment about "little green men," or "hillbilly witnesses" that do nothing but illuminate their own stupidity. It would be the same thing if after reporting on Condolezza Rice if the TV anchors turned to each other and made some jokey comment about her liking fried chicken and watermelon.

It just chaps my hide sometimes to see every other UFO TV show call itself the "_________ Roswell," or fail to miss the point that a particular UFO case is always going to be part of a larger social and evidentiary context, of which Roswell is only a tiny part.

Like it or not, these cable documentaries and stray news reports are the only way much of the general public gets information about UFOs. Few delve into the long history, the most interesting cases, and the most compelling evidence.

A UFO clearinghouse, someplace the media would know about and where they could get good, free (or cheap) information and compelling statistics about the subject, easy access to recognized researchers and experts in the field, audio, video, and so on, would be a good thing to have and promote.

A Board of Directors could include researchers, scientists, skeptics and believers, civilian and military, from all over the world, all reviewing the available UFO information and ensuring that it's presented fairly and accurately as possible, with both pros and cons of each case discussed. The organization itself would run on donations and volunteers, like other non-profit groups.

The hope would eventually be that all the junk UFO reporting could be minimized, and that documentary audiences and TV/web video viewers could trust that they're being presented the best possible available evidence. A "UFO Media Link" stamp of approval would mean the mark of quality, and not just junk.

Just an idea. Let me know how it turns out.


[edit on 16-2-2007 by SuicideVirus]




posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 07:11 PM
link   
It won't happen.

Few people in the field of UFO research can agree to make the same conclusions on cases - how can you expect a larger body of people to agree on ANYTHING when UFO research is concerned?

Part of the UFO culture is sifting through the bunk to identify the quality stories. Hard work and dedicated investigation will always be required to attain as many facts as possible.

Media outlets are probably controlled, so they only want to report what they are told to report with. Why would they be concerned with the 'truth', as documented by a panel of 'experts'?

In many ways, your 'UFO clearinghouse' already exists. It's called 'The Internet' and websites like this one are an important resource to disseminate information to all and sundry.

Media outlets and individuals have the capability to search through the online information and sift the layers of bunk from the evidence. Whether or not they choose to do so will ultimately be an indictor of their persistence to find what they are looking for.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
It won't happen.

Few people in the field of UFO research can agree to make the same conclusions on cases - how can you expect a larger body of people to agree on ANYTHING when UFO research is concerned?


I'm not asking anybody to reach conclusions. But we can agree on some basic information, such as who were the people involved, when did it happen, what was their actual testimony, what do the experts say about any photos or videos, etc. How many people see UFOs in a year? Have there been similar sightings or reports? Facts, in other words. The debate can certainly continue, but it would be nice if the media had access to the actual facts of the matter. It might make them less likely to diminish the reports with a chuckle and a joke about "anal probes."


Part of the UFO culture is sifting through the bunk to identify the quality stories. Hard work and dedicated investigation will always be required to attain as many facts as possible.


But most media don't have the time or money that hobbyists like ourselves can devote to the subject. They need reliable information fast and cheap, and don't want to pick through all the garbage on the Internet to find the good stuff. Not like us.


Media outlets are probably controlled, so they only want to report what they are told to report with. Why would they be concerned with the 'truth', as documented by a panel of 'experts'?


I worked for a documentary company for three years and "control" is not nearly as important as the economics. The companies want to create cheap product that's entertaining so they can get advertising money. Nobody I ever met was interested in blocking this theoretical "truth" of which you speak.


In many ways, your 'UFO clearinghouse' already exists. It's called 'The Internet' and websites like this one are an important resource to disseminate information to all and sundry.


Like I said, I consider the Internet to be a huge garbage dump, only marginally useful to producers on a deadline.


Media outlets and individuals have the capability to search through the online information and sift the layers of bunk from the evidence. Whether or not they choose to do so will ultimately be an indictor of their persistence to find what they are looking for.


And there you explain perfectly why every other UFO program is called the "_________ Roswell," and the shows are consistently less than compelling. Because of the time and money issues, UFO program producers rely on the amateurs and hobbyists to help them find good, cheap information quickly.

All I'm suggesting is to make it easier for them to find the information they're looking for, because in my experience, once people know the facts and the scope of the UFO field, there's more of a tendency they'll consider it seriously, and not as a joke. Much like myself, the joke is getting really old.

[edit on 17-2-2007 by SuicideVirus]



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by SuicideVirus
All I'm suggesting is to make it easier for them to find the information they're looking for, because in my experience, once people know the facts and the scope of the UFO field, there's more of a tendency they'll consider it seriously, and not as a joke. Much like myself, the joke is getting really old.
[edit on 17-2-2007 by SuicideVirus]


I work with lots of people who think that UFOs are a joke. They don't bother me at all. It's not them that I am trying to convince, I only poke around looking for sightings and evidence to satisfy my curiosity. I believe them to be true, without having any proof or good evidence. My three sightings have been very weak, weak and mildly interesting but not convincing. I'll keep on hoping for first-hand conclusive proof, but I never stop believing that they exist. I trust the thousands of people who have verifiable accounts of UFO activity and the evidence gathered to support their claims. The number of hoaxes does not discourage me - it's the number of interesting cases that encourages me.

Don't lose faith, mate! No matter how old you get, you never know when that one good break might come your way and leave you with something that you've been seeking to find.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join