Psychic TV in the Cards

Do you believe in magic? Well, it appears TV executives think you do. Just to be sure we’re speaking the same language, I’m not talking about the magic of David Copperfield or the like, but the magical thinking of John Edward and James Van Praagh and other purported psychics or mediums or whatever they are calling themselves these days. (Alas, none of them seem to be interested in using the more descriptive terms like “fraud” or “con-man” or “cold reader.”)

As you may have heard, John Edward is expanding the number of people who will be able to fall for his shtick. He can currently only be found on the SciFi channel – which is quite appropriate seeing as the second part of the channel’s name is “Fiction.” However, his show, Crossing Over, is going into syndication next season as well and stations in all the major markets have picked it up.

TV Guide’s June 16 issue reports that he is not alone in the psychic TV biz. The producer of The Weakest Link is preparing a new psychic show for NBC syndication starting in 2002. His show will feature Char, who TV Guide describes as, “a psychic and talk-show staple since the ‘70s who also chats with the dead.” Of course she does – wouldn’t want to miss out on a trend like that one.

Ferdie Pacheco, an Internet astrologer, is also developing a show. And you know Miss Cleo, the Jamaican tarot reader from the infomercials? Yup, her too.

We can’t forget about James Van Praagh, author of Talking to Heaven and Reaching to Heaven, who not only has his own series in the works, but is also the subject of an upcoming CBS miniseries starring no less than Ted Danson. Oh, how far Danson has fallen since his Cheers days.

This particular article contained no hint that maybe these guys (and ladies) aren’t all they’re cracked up to be. That shouldn’t be surprising, though, since it was written by contributing editor Michael Logan, who is such a True Believer that he took the role of “The Believer” in a recent debate about John Edward in that same magazine (April 7). Well-known skeptic James “The Amazing” Randi took the role designated as “The Nonbeliever.”

Much of Logan’s “Believer” article concentrates on allegations of trickery, such as asking audience members to fill out information cards or spying on them with microphones. The producers, of course, deny such things. But, frankly, I think that misses the point. Edward, like all the “mediums” and “psychics” before him, doesn’t need such trickery (whether he uses it or not is still a matter of debate). The simple techniques of cold reading suffice quite well.

Logan briefly mentions cold reading in a claim by Gary Schwartz, a University of Arizona psychology professor who believes in Edward’s abilities. He claims to have tested Edwards in a lab environment where cold reading couldn’t work. The problem is that all too often we’ve seen scientists taken in by trickery that magicians could catch if they were only consulted.

In any event, it should surprise nobody that Logan is a True Believer because he has had two readings from Edward that “knocked [his] socks off.” As I noted earlier, though, he focuses his reasons for believing on the idea that Edward had no spies or hidden mikes or whatnot. Mr. Logan just doesn’t understand that Edward (or any other cold reader) doesn’t need such information.

Randi, on the other hand, begins by slamming Edward (okay, so that’s not a big surprise). Indeed, Randi doesn’t even think Edward is a particularly talented cold reader. “He is a run-of-the-mill operator profiting from grief,” he says. He then goes on to explain some of Edward’s methods. For example, he talks about an appearance Edward made on the Today show in which he was supposed to be getting information about a dead relative for a woman in the audience. But, whoops! Edward said he later found out it was actually a message for a parking attendant outside. As Randi says, “If the field of possibilities includes everyone within a New York City block, John Edward cannot fail.”

Also hitting on the idea of using trickery, Randi points out that audience members write in for tickets, which means the staff has their names and addresses, and can therefore get their telephone numbers and other data about them that could provide a “miracle ‘hit.’” He also notes that we have only Edward’s word (and that of the producers) that information discussed by people waiting to be on the show as they sit around talking doesn’t make it back to him, or that audience note cards that are encouraged (though not required) by the staff don’t get somehow used, or that none of the editing ever skews things to make Edward look more successful than he really is.

Randi then takes a look at a specific episode and describes “a rather bad guessing game.” He starts with a father figure, moves to a younger man, then to a “D” name that turns out to be his mother-in-law. Edward counted all of these as hits even though he didn’t actually say anything about them. As Randi says, “He simply knew that a fifty-something man in the audience had a father who had died.” Randi also points out several “gimmicks” Edward uses to instantly correct any errors in such a way that most people won’t even notice he’d been wrong to begin with. He summarizes by saying the reading was a “resounding failure,” yet the subject of the reading ended up in tears and everybody around was impressed.

Neither of the articles refers to the other, even though they ran side-by-side (so calling it a “debate” kind of overstated the matter). It’s too bad, because I’d love to know what Mr. Logan thinks about everything Randi said. Actually, I guess we do know that if we look at the more recent article on the other psychics – he appears to have ignored everything Randi said. Logan seems to have simply taken anything good said about Edward at face value because he had a good reading from him. I have to wonder if he seriously took a critical look. OK, I don’t really have to wonder – I suspect I already know the answer. Hopefully, readers of the two articles will have better success at separating the sense from the nonsense. But considering the way these shows are proliferating, I’m not counting on it. We can all look forward to a lot more unreality in our reality TV in the next few seasons.

Be sure to sign up for our e-mail update so you can stay informed about new articles on the site! And take a look around rest of the site. You can find our most recent articles at the Home page, and browse through our book reviews. You can even buy reality show stuff at our Survivor and Reality TV Store!

For more articles about reality TV, be sure to check out RealityTVFans.com and SirLinksALot!