We Want You! to Promote 2012
Today I was one of many recipients of an email blast that went out, apparently, to anyone on the Internet who has ever blogged, spoken, or thought about the 2012 myth. I give it here (name shortened so as not to embarrass a nice person simply doing her job):
Hi,
My name is S.F. and I am working on a project for the History Channel. We are searching for 2 lead investigators to host a tv series documentary on the topic of 2012 and other unexplained phenomena.I saw your site and work and would love to talk to you.
http://www.seekers2012.com – please see all information here.
As your website and life have brought me here I think that you might be interested in looking further at what we are looking for and perhaps help us find our people or if it is you, we hope that you will sign up!
We would also really appreciate it if you could possibly post to your blog as well or send to your network. Any help in our quest would be great!
Please let me know how I can help you. Thank you!
We are on twitter here: http://www.twitter.com/seekers2012
Alarm bells were clanging the Red Alert in my head from the opening sentence, but I gave her the benefit of the doubt and clicked on the link. In short, they are casting for a History Channel series and are hoping for the Internet to do their work for them. Here is an excerpt from the site:
Documentary series for the History Channel, surrounding the Mayan prediction that 2012 will be the END OF DAYS as well as other unexplained phenomena.
WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR
Male & Female Investigators who are scientists, explorers, or adventurers with advanced degrees (Ph.D desired).
Ideal Investigators would already be a team (husband and wife, co- workers) who fall somewhere between the FBI Agents on “The X Files” and “Indiana Jones”. One is a believer, the other a skeptic. One is driven by reason, science and empirical evidence, the other by feelings, intuitions and faith.
Ideally, the woman would be the skeptic and the man the believer. We are not limiting ourselves to an existing team nor will we rule out a woman who is the believer and a man who is the skeptic. We are open to any combination as long as they are articulate, passionate, and knowledgeable.
Investigators must also be genuinely curious as to why there are predictions in nearly every culture that the world will end in 2012.
Obviously, they will have no trouble getting people to fall all over themselves competing for these roles. But if, as they say, they are genuinely interested in getting Ph.Ds (at least Ph.Ds in any relevant science) will who concur with their premise, good luck to them. Bailing Balloon Kid’s dad out of prison is probably as close to a “scientist” as they will get.
So here was my reply:
Your website says “there are predictions in nearly every culture that the world will end in 2012.” In fact, outside of New Age beliefs that have arisen in the past few years, there are NO known predictions of that in ANY culture, or any credible reasons to believe 2012 is any different from any other year. Science journalists like myself work hard to get people interested in the wonders of our natural universe, and the malignant spread of made-up nonsense like this makes that task so much harder. Consequently, I consider your project harmful to the intellect, and I choose not to promote it.
I don’t know how other recipients answered, but I hope it was with something similar, if at all. As I said, shows like this are not in the public interest. They are lazy. They substitute sensationalism for good writing. It’s hard to write an exciting piece of entertainment, but it’s easier if you simply leech off of a popular superstition. Paying lip service to science by offering to have “a skeptic AND a believer” does not change the obvious fact that this show is based on an untrue premise and leverages fear to promote a preselected conclusion.
Nobody knows better than I how hard it is to write good entertainment when you burden yourself with the requirement that the information you present, in addition to being great entertainment, also be helpful to the audience. That’s why we’ve spent two years (so far) developing The Skeptologists.
The audience does not have much expertise in science beyond what we, as the content providers, give them. So, at the end of the day, the blame for the plummeting quality of science broadcasting has to land squarely in the lap of the producers of shows like this one. Audiences are not demanding true information or false information: They demand good entertainment. The value of the information we choose to deliver with that entertainment is the measure of our character.
I watched some similar nonsense on the ‘discovery’ channel. It was infuriating to watch them go through all of the improbably situations. the scientists then say that there is no reason for any of these disasters to happen, but the narrator intoned….”but they might be wrong!” Scaremongering idiocy. They threw in everything except the LHC, and I’m sure it will be added as an end of the world scenario as soon as someone thinks of it!
I can only imagine that any rationally-minded skeptic who does get involved in this program will only have his/her viewpoints edited in such a way as to make him/her look like a stubborn, close-minded and ignornant fool. After all, the target audience is the uninformed or under-informed; logic will not entertain them as much as scare-mongering (non-scientific) theories highlighted by images of erupting volcanoes, giant tornadoes, and plummeting asteroids.
This kind of nonsense is becoming the standard fare on the History Channel. They should at least be honest and rename it the Hysteria Channel.
It was a lot better back when it was just the Hitler Channel.
I just gave up and started calling it the Bullshit Channel about a year ago when every other hour was dedicated to Nostradamus…
Comment also posted on Facebook: I love your response Brian. I would hope most of the others in our circle that got this send them something similar so the History Channel knows there is a group of people out there that is sick of the bullshit documentaries these channels are putting together.
Our skeptic friend David Morrison (NASA’s “Ask an astrobiologist”) reports an unusual number of very, very frightened emails from people who have heard the 2012 hype and are worried about impending disaster. Your response was spot on. Maybe you have at least raised the consciousness of the staff member — though I have my doubts about the higher ups.
The History Channel is complete garbage these days. I knew they had jumped the shark over a year ago when they had a show on, that seriously posed the question: Is there a black hole at the bottom of the ocean, in the bermuda triangle… They featured “Dr.” John Hutchison as one of their “experts”.
For those that don’t know him, google “the hutchison effect”. He would be a good topic for this site, actually. I was amazed that the history channel labeled him “Dr.” because I doubt the man even has a high school diploma let alone a Phd.
My son (then 6) and I watched that together and he looked at me and said..”This is crap!”
So could we get this producers email address so we can deluge them with reason and request to produce the skeptologists.
There is enough crap out there, I would love to see some real science on the Discovery channel ( I thought that what the Discovery channel was for!)
“…Obviously, they will have no trouble getting people to fall all over themselves competing for these roles…”
The History Channel is so Junior High. I once actually had my name appear in the end credits of an independent production that aired on that channel, and when I got the video in the mail and saw it I was aghast. Go directly to jail, do pass go, do not collect 200 dollars.
I think I’ll watch the rerun in 2013.
Now that was funny!
My plan was to ignore it. Otherwise I think a phone conversation may be worthwhile, if you think there is any chance to edumacate them.
My confidence is high that there is not such a chance. If they already have a History Channel deal (which they probably do, judging only by their claim that they do), then the content of their show is already carved in stone.
I also replied to them again and said I’m willing to have my mind changed if they can convince me that they’re open to anything other than promoting the 2012 myth. They did not reply.
Did you use big words Brian? Sometimes that confuses them.
http://www.gotcast.com/casting-calls/ViewOpenCall.aspx?ContestID=55209
The website for the casting call.
I personally think this kind of programming is irresponsible if not dangerous.
How is this history? Even the Mayan descendants wonder what all this crap is about. I’m glad you answered the “call” the way you did. It would be unethical to add to the hoopla. I remember all the stuff about 2000, when all the computers were supposed to explode. Really!
I agree with Max–I’ll watch the reruns in 2013, so I can laugh!
Hmmm… I never did think to wander into Mexico and ask about 2012. They’ll probably laugh at me and make up more jokes about stoopeed gringo toorists.
I know someone who worked on one of these 2012 “documentary’s” and when she brought up the fact that the Classic Mayan culture disappeared long before white people arrived, she was told “oh well they could have predicted the arrival.” Even thought there is no evidence, it went into the film.
And yes the problem is people believe what they see on discovery and history channels
Hopefully the entire science and skeptical blog community responds the same.
Having tried it myself (http://quay.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/a-response-to-some-vaccination-concerns/), I realized how incredibly difficult it is to provide factual information that is even remotely entertaining; which makes your Skeptoid (as well as the rest of the community) that much more impressive.
Penn and Teller had a great episode about the 2012 stuff (featuring a pair of “investigators”), showing some scientists who basically said “there’s really not even indication that the Mayans believed this”. The sad part is that once 2012 passes, most will not even look back and think “Hmm… perhaps we should have been a bit more skeptical about this”.
The even sadder part will be that even fewer will think, “Perhaps we should be a bit more skeptical about the next woo claim to come along.”
The even sadder part is that made-up doomsday scenarios and conspiracy theories desensitize and distract from real problems and conspiracies.
Actually the sad part is that they’ll just pick a new date, and start all over again, and the gullible will buy it up just like they’ve bought up every other end of the world prediction in recent memory.
Yeah…how many woosters were saying the world was going to end in 1999?
i dunno, i was too busy partying.
What’s sad is that I believe that the people at Discovery Channel et al know that this is bullshit…or don’t care. They are just capitalising off the movie that just came out.
Yeah, I don’t see them liquidating all their assets in preparation for the end of the world.
You are right, they don’t care. They are not in the education business, they are in the entertainment business. Although you & I like it when those goals happen to overlap, most people who make it their business don’t care.
I’d advise employing extreme critical thinking techniques when viewing any AETN channel.
“A&E Television Networks (AETN) a joint venture of The Hearst Corporation, Disney-ABC Television Group and NBC Universal, is an award-winning, international media company offering consumers a diverse communications environment ranging from television programming, to home videos/DVDs and music CDs, to Web sites, as well as supporting nationwide educational initiatives.
AETN is comprised of A&E Network®, History™, History International™, Bio™, History en español™, Military History™,Crime & Investigation Network™, A&E HD™, THC HD™, AETN International, A&E IndieFilms™ and AETN Consumer Products.” And Lifetime channels according to logos on their websites. http://www.aetn.com/about.html
The History Channel, like Discovery et al, has been moving away from its original format almost from the time is went on the cable (air?). As a skeptic historian I find it vary disaponiting that they do no seek out the many qualified and interesting people who could host a series that entertains, informs and is free of Wo. The problem is not a shortage of “Carl Sagans” but a shortage of prgramers that can be convinced that such program could make money. I wonder how much money “Cosmos” or “Conections” made? I bet it was far more then most of the crap they broadcast now. Our job is to try and teach the future “programers” to have an appreciation for good science and history.
I went on a rampage at work the other day about this, they know im a skeptic and they are trying to convince me im going to die on 2012. And this is just more fuel to their fire.
Ask them to give you all their stuff, since they won’t be needing it.
Agreed. Give them each $100 in consideration for a signed contract to pay you $10,000 on 1/1/2013.
brilliant! ask for more than 10K though. i’m sure they can afford it.
You simply must reply and accept! With some luck, you can get your skeptical voice on the air before they realize what is happening!
If the show is based on the false premise that “there are predictions in nearly every culture that the world will end in 2012″, the editors probably won’t allow the skeptic to knock down the whole premise.
Not a hope in hell. They’ll deliberately ask questions to which the only sensible reply would be “We don’t know” and they’ll edit so that someone asks an unrelated question (to which we do know the answer) and dub in the “we don’t know”, thus making the geek look like a total moron and jacking off the egos of the gullible by suggesting that even the geeks don’t know. That’s just one simple example of the tactics used by people who make such flicks; if you want to learn about more tricks, try talking to people who have been the victims of such manipulation (for example, R. Dawkins in “Expelled”). Sadly, ‘news’ is part of the entertainment and advertising industry so even alleged journalists stoop to such trickery (there are still some good journalists though).
Way to go Brian!
By the way, any progress with the Skeptologists?
I find it rather bizarre that they could actually believe that a “believer” with a PhD can be found – they must have watched too many episodes of X-Files without realizing it was just a show for entertainment. I’d love to hear what William Davis would have to say about the 2012 craze.
I’d love to see scientists do a comparison of how people react to crisis in 2012 vs other years and if the hysteria can be blamed for lives that might not otherwise have been lost and costs that might not otherwise have been incurred. What is the toll of promoting nonsense on a grand scale?
Here’s the challenge the skeptical community should put forth: Anyone who makes a documentary, writes a book, gives lectures promoting the end of the world in 2012 should be challenged ahead of time to share liability for whatever cost their hysteria incurs should the world not end.
Of course they’ll ignore the challenge and carry on fearmongering, but at least it’ll be out there for the public to see, and come 2013 there can be a nice little side-by-side comparison estimating profits by named 2012 proponents vs international cost in money and lives.
I’ve asked those who promote the end of times with their DVDs, books etc to deposit their life savings to my bank account and deeds to their properties to my name during November 2012. No takers as yet. I guess even though they’re profiting from an obvious hoax, they’re not willing to put their snake oil winnings where their mouths are. A glimmer of hope or simply an admission of guilt? I know where I’m putting my money.
Well I guess I’ll be the contrarian here. I think this show will be a good thing (not really, but everyone here seems to agree). A show that will show a balance between the skeptical point of view and the stupid point of view is inherently out of balance and therefore will attract people who believe in 2012. By accepting the role of the “skeptic” on this show whoever goes on will be able to reach an audience which is normally closed off to skepticism, closed off to reason. Maybe it will be a travesty, maybe it will be lopsided and edited, but if you can convince one of these 2012 morons to not sell all their worldly possessions and go stand in the middle of a field in a bath robe waiting for the aliens to arrive to help them make a “resource based economy”, then that is a good thing. So be the underdog I say, go into a match and fight the paper Tyson because if the show tries to make the skeptic look small and the moron big, then the skeptic will impress and the “believer” will fail to fill the daddy pants.
So I’ll say that this show on 2012 will be a good thing…I just wish I had more than a B.A. so that I could apply to be the skeptic. I would even be willing to use words like asshole on television when describing the believer. Surely that would be entertaining. :-)
Uhm, if you ever meet anyone who does editing even for TV news, try asking how much they shoot vs how much ever makes it to air. If anything these pretend documentaries throw out even more material – after all, you can’t keep anything which doesn’t support the woo you’re selling whereas the news people will mostly be throwing out stuff that doesn’t look good or ‘sound good’ – whatever that may be (plus lots cut out because ad time is really much more important than anything anyone could say). You can sit in a sound stage and have an actual intelligent conversation with people, but what you see in the final product will be totally alien to you and you really are made to appear to be answering questions which you were never actually asked and giving responses which you would never have given if you were actually asked those questions. That’s the thing people have such a hard time understanding – it’s showbiz – *nothing* is real.
You’re pretty naive if you think they’re going to give the scientists a fair shot on a show like this.
On their “Is a black hole in the bottom of the ocean” show, they used a few real physicists and astronomers to support their nonsense, by taking everything the experts said out of context to make it appear like the premise wasn’t totally insane.
One thought I keep having is that all of the discussion and shows on 2012 may be encouraging unstable people to cause something to happen on 21 Dec 2012. I am especially worried about unstable national leaders who could view themselves as facilitating the return of their own religion’s dead founder through the use of military action.
They probably don’t want a real skeptic because the charade would be over too fast.
Then again, I suppose if you played nice and let them make their claims before dismantling them maybe it would work. I doubt that the show would outright endorse the claims because the network would look pretty silly in 2013.
It would be better if skeptics simply steered clear of this opportunity. Let the snake oil salesmen have their limelight. Let them sell their DVDs and books. 2013 isn’t too far away from 21/12/12. It would be a better investment of time if a skeptical approach was a fast forward into the future and presenting a show based in 2013 with all the excuses these idiots will be drumming up to cover their asses.
Although there are many horrible documentarys such as this on the Discovery and History channels there are some good ones too. In the wave on “holy grail” documentarys following The Da Vinchi Code there were many that explored the historical notions and found that they were untrue. (as well as many that were more credulous). This project sounds like garbage but I have hope that there will be some that takes the 2012 jumping off point and have real content… somone might actually learn somthing. The thing that led me to skepticisim was not somone telling me what we learned, but it was people looking for some amazing claim and finding that it did not hold water. This will be an unpopular view to the treu beleaver, so take them on the journey with you. Always look for the ghost, and be rigorous and when you don’t find it, any honest person cannot claim that you are just an ignorant skeptic.
In a credulous Ghost documentary they ended with their token skeptic. He concluded that “There are no haunted places, only haunted people.”
That instilled doubt in me, they left it in not bacause it shows skepticisim, but bacause it was a good line.
Is TV providing programming that is really no better than the majority of crap that people are willing read on the internet?
Oh wait, there is a reason why I haven’t owned a TV in years.
To be fair, some of the best content in TV history has been on the air in the last few years. Unfortunately some of the worst as well. For science, take Planet Earth or Nova. For fiction Damages or Breaking Bad. For comedy, Curb Your Enthusiasm or Big Bang Theory. There are many other good ones as well (cast your votes now). The bad surely outweighs the good, but there is more good than I have time to watch.
Scrubs, the Office (both versions), BSG, BTVS, Rome, Deadwood, Cracker (BBC version), Life on Mars (BBC version), Being Human (since i’m on a BBC roll) and pretty much anything on the Science Channel.
The believe in pseudo-science, the paranormal, and the absolute rubbish continues with an ever growing interest thanks to the so called science and history channels.
the actual Science channel is good. the ones posing as science channels are utter crap.
Never mind 2012; reading 1984 by George Orwell might issue an inkling of what all this is about.
I’m thankful that I’m not the only one suffering from the History Channel’s assault on rational thought with endless 2012 and Nostradamus nonsense. I even did a little spitting in the wind with a blog entry 2012 Business Opportunity. This week I’m feeling better because of WWII in HD, actual history on the History channel, an excellent to boot.
I don’t know how other recipients answered, but I hope it was with something similar, if at all.
your fellow skepticblogger karen had a pretty funny reply.
http://skepbitch.wordpress.com/2009/11/17/paranormal-superstar/
alas, i think both of your chances for getting chosen are quite slim.
My archaeology based website was bombarded with a similar request for hosts and met with similar response. Thanks to SkepticBlog for providing the motivation to bitch slap pseudoscience! Read it here: http://sexyarchaeology.org/?p=901