A few years ago I posted the following story on a 'Woo' forum:
A few months later I received a private message on the forum from an American production company who wished to interview me regarding my story, for a programme called 'Cursed' which ran on the Bio Channel. I agreed in principle, and agreed to a telephone discussion to talk more about my story. A young woman phoned me from America, and asked me to tell my story to her over the phone, and she asked me a few questions - several times I pointed out that the Crying Boy legend was total rubbish, and that I did not believe in these things, but she asked me if I would be interested in doing a filmed interview. Thinking that this would be an opportunity to debunk the Crying Boy 'phenomenon', I agreed.
A few weeks later, the interview took place with an independent UK film crew and interviewer, who had been briefed by the production company and given a list of questions to ask me.
Prior to, and during, the interview I made my scepticism blatantly clear, and I thought I made a good job of putting this myth to rest. Little did I know the power of good editing for TV...
I didn't manage to catch the show on TV, but fast forward to the present, and I have discovered the entire episode on YouTube, as aired:
http://ift.tt/1rSXGXn
My segment starts at around the 20 minute mark...
There are so many things wrong with the way this is presented, I can't even begin to tackle it all, but if we ignore the obvious - somehow my Gran's semi-detached council house in a small village in rural Yorkshire has bizarrely been transformed into a dingy shack in the Florida Everglades - I'll address the main points.
Obviously, I could tell that the questions being asked were very much leading, and I did what I thought was my best to flat out get over the sceptical point of view, but now I know why they asked me to speak quite slowly...
They left out, edited out several key things or edited together unrelated phrases to make it seem like I was saying certain things - in particular they omitted my explanation about my Gran's house being very old, with dodgy wiring, and that the painting was hung over a plug socket which my Gran was fond over leaving switched on, and overloading with extensions and plugs... Hence why I described the fires as 'localised'.
My supposed comment about the painting remaining unscathed after some of the house fires is also without context, as I also explained that this was the case because the fires were very small, and mainly concerned the carpet beneath the plug socket, and the armchair right next to that - the fire didn't reach the painting. I think my original comment was something like "the fire didn't actually travel up the wall, so the painting remained unscathed".
The best example I can give you though comes from the end of my segment where I say "The Curse is real". Again, this has been completely edited out of context - the girl conducting the interview was obviously aware of my total scepticism after chatting to me prior to the interview, and after asking the first few questions, so near the end of the list of questions she said to me, "OK, this is a bit strange, but they want me to ask you this anyway, despite everything - 'At what point did you realise the curse was real?'"
So, the camera is running - pointed right at me - and I just laughed in bewilderment, shrugged, gave her an incredulous look and finally managed to say "At no point did I think the curse is real!" I think you can all see what they did there...
The funny thing is, afterwards, a friend asked me how it went and I basically told him that I thought they'do have to work REALLY hard to salvage ANYTHING out of that interview... Wow. They worked DAMN hard...
All that said, the one thing they couldn't edit out, take out of context, or otherwise misrepresent is the amused grin on my face throughout, which I hope manages to convey my disdain and disbelief regarding the subject of 'The Curse'!
Thoughts? Questions?
Quote:
From Wikipedia: * Quote:
* My Grandmother had one of these paintings since the early 70's, and when the story broke in 1985 I was living with her, just outside Leeds.* She had suffered a few minor (but still costly and damaging) fires in the house over the years, and being a superstitious type immediately blamed them on the painting after reading the story.* * As the tabloid stories reached fever pitch, she decided that she didn't want it in the house anymore.* Problem was, by this time the 'hype' and legends about this picture had reached epic proportions - apparently if you tried to destroy it or throw it away, you would experience the dreaded (unspecified) "BAD LUCK", and perhaps even DIE!* Being naturally sceptical and foolhardy, I offered to get rid of it for her and suffer any "BAD LUCK" - it says a lot about my Gran that she agreed to let her young teenage grandson 'take one for the team' and risk the "BAD LUCK"! :icon_mrgreen: * As a child I was always interested in myths, legends, ghosts, monsters, etc, etc.* In fact, ghost stories scared the absolute crap out of me as a young boy which is why, as I got older, I turned to debunking them to exorcize my fears.* Getting rid of the offending painting would offer me my first chance to actively debunk something allegedly paranormal, as I decided to attempt what was supposedly impossible if you believed the rumours of the day - to destroy the painting by burning. * In my Gran's back garden was an old 10 gallon oil drum which used to be used as a compost bin, now empty.* I filled it half full of dry hedge cuttings, twigs and newspapers.* I then took the painting out of its frame, crumpled it up loosely, dropped it into the drum and topped the whole lot off with lashings of petrol from the tin in the garage. * I'll be perfectly honest and admit that I struck the match and dropped it into the drum with some trepidation, a tiny bit of hesitation and a slight wobble to the hand.* This may have knocked my aim off slightly, as the lit match dropped into the drum, got caught in some twigs which (amazingly) had avoided being soaked in petrol, and burnt itself out.* The next lit match disappeared into the drum, and for a second nothing happened - then "WoooOOOOMPH!"; that lovely, soft, exploding noise you get when a LOT of petrol goes up at once. * It was a while before I could even get near the drum; it was that hot, the thin layer of rust covering the outside of it was popping and sparking.* In the end I had to get the garden hose on it, then inside it, before I could see what had happened.* As it was now half full of water, I decided to kick the drum over - I couldn't believe what surfed out on a wave of black water. Incredibly enough, there was a partially burned dead bird (a sparrow) in there!* It must have been covered in a layer of what was left of the compost at the bottom of the barrel and been preserved, because the flames had hardly touched it!* How bizarre. * Oh, the painting?* Gone - it must have burned up a treat. :icon_wink: * True story. * Actually, I think we all know it was a foregone conclusion that the painting would burn - if we analyse two isolated pieces of the Wikipedia quote above, we find our biggest clue as to the nature of the Crying Boy myth: * Compare: * "The Sun reported that a firefighter from Yorkshire was claiming that undamaged copies of the painting were frequently found amidst the ruins of burned houses." * With: * "The Sun was organising mass bonfires of the paintings, sent in by readers." |
A few months later I received a private message on the forum from an American production company who wished to interview me regarding my story, for a programme called 'Cursed' which ran on the Bio Channel. I agreed in principle, and agreed to a telephone discussion to talk more about my story. A young woman phoned me from America, and asked me to tell my story to her over the phone, and she asked me a few questions - several times I pointed out that the Crying Boy legend was total rubbish, and that I did not believe in these things, but she asked me if I would be interested in doing a filmed interview. Thinking that this would be an opportunity to debunk the Crying Boy 'phenomenon', I agreed.
A few weeks later, the interview took place with an independent UK film crew and interviewer, who had been briefed by the production company and given a list of questions to ask me.
Prior to, and during, the interview I made my scepticism blatantly clear, and I thought I made a good job of putting this myth to rest. Little did I know the power of good editing for TV...
I didn't manage to catch the show on TV, but fast forward to the present, and I have discovered the entire episode on YouTube, as aired:
http://ift.tt/1rSXGXn
My segment starts at around the 20 minute mark...
There are so many things wrong with the way this is presented, I can't even begin to tackle it all, but if we ignore the obvious - somehow my Gran's semi-detached council house in a small village in rural Yorkshire has bizarrely been transformed into a dingy shack in the Florida Everglades - I'll address the main points.
Obviously, I could tell that the questions being asked were very much leading, and I did what I thought was my best to flat out get over the sceptical point of view, but now I know why they asked me to speak quite slowly...
They left out, edited out several key things or edited together unrelated phrases to make it seem like I was saying certain things - in particular they omitted my explanation about my Gran's house being very old, with dodgy wiring, and that the painting was hung over a plug socket which my Gran was fond over leaving switched on, and overloading with extensions and plugs... Hence why I described the fires as 'localised'.
My supposed comment about the painting remaining unscathed after some of the house fires is also without context, as I also explained that this was the case because the fires were very small, and mainly concerned the carpet beneath the plug socket, and the armchair right next to that - the fire didn't reach the painting. I think my original comment was something like "the fire didn't actually travel up the wall, so the painting remained unscathed".
The best example I can give you though comes from the end of my segment where I say "The Curse is real". Again, this has been completely edited out of context - the girl conducting the interview was obviously aware of my total scepticism after chatting to me prior to the interview, and after asking the first few questions, so near the end of the list of questions she said to me, "OK, this is a bit strange, but they want me to ask you this anyway, despite everything - 'At what point did you realise the curse was real?'"
So, the camera is running - pointed right at me - and I just laughed in bewilderment, shrugged, gave her an incredulous look and finally managed to say "At no point did I think the curse is real!" I think you can all see what they did there...
The funny thing is, afterwards, a friend asked me how it went and I basically told him that I thought they'do have to work REALLY hard to salvage ANYTHING out of that interview... Wow. They worked DAMN hard...
All that said, the one thing they couldn't edit out, take out of context, or otherwise misrepresent is the amused grin on my face throughout, which I hope manages to convey my disdain and disbelief regarding the subject of 'The Curse'!
Thoughts? Questions?
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1zLfR5v
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire