I’m not making this blog the anti-Sylvia blog – honestly. (I’ll leave that to Stop Sylvia Browne.) And I hadn’t intended boring people with any more about Sylvia for a while. But it’s just great when anti-Sylvia articles are going mainstream. Following from CNN’s Anderson Cooper segment, is yesterday’s Chicago Sun Times article by Richard Roeper (he of the Ebert and Roeper movie reviews), that starts:
Remember that moment last year when it was announced they had come up with a vaccine that blocks nicotine addiction? How about when the troops began returning home from Iraq?
The Jennifer Aniston wedding -- that was something.
Not to mention the Nicole Kidman and Jennifer Lopez pregnancies, and the surprise defeat of Gov. Schwarzenegger in California.
What's that? You have no memory of any of those events taking place in 2006?
I suppose that's because they never happened -- despite the psychic powers of Sylvia Browne, who last January predicted all those things and many more events that did not occur.
To be fair, Browne did foresee the Britney Spears divorce. Pretty impressive, seeing as how the rest of the world was sure Brit and K-Fed would last forever.
I would say Roeper’s article gets two thumbs up, if the phrase wasn’t trademarked. So instead I just emailed Roeper to congratulate him on a good article.
Only problem I see with the article is this statement: "I know some psychics have actually helped authorities crack missing persons and murder cases." How does he *know* that? Because they said so?
Posted by: Paul | January 23, 2007 at 11:13 AM
Enough already. :) Was there even a chance she was for real? Maybe Montel was convinced, but I'm shocked people give her this much thought. I think the term is pornoparapsychology (although it's all crap)!
Posted by: Louie | January 23, 2007 at 03:49 PM
I was hating Sylvia Browne before hating Sylvia Browne was cool.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | January 23, 2007 at 04:44 PM
The pro-Sylvia brigade, who can cheerfully declare that black is white without coaching, will just chant the approved mantra, "you mentioned three cases where Sylvia was off the boil, but what about the hundreds of cases where she was right? She's not GOD, you know!... No, I can't actually name any of these cases off-hand, but just watch Medium on TV. That's a documentary series directly based on her cases. Do you really think the TV executives don't thoroughly research their sources in the finest detail? D'UH!"
Posted by: Big Al | January 24, 2007 at 01:59 AM
"Oh, unless it's a so-called documentary about 9/11 not being an inside job. Then they're just lying through their teeth for the Illuminati."
Posted by: Big Al | January 24, 2007 at 05:19 AM
It's all so half-hearted. There is never proper and just condemnation in the media of con artists like Sylvia Browne. It's just the same on British TV with quack medicine. There are always enough caveats and doubts thrown in by woolly minded presenters who feel they have to show some "balance" to keep the credulous still credulous.
The reason is the media sponsors and accountants love this stuff because it's an incredibly easy way to rake in the profits. They are complicit with the "psychic" charlatans in fleecing the gullible and desperate, and just as guilty. If this isn't true, why aren't the likes of those two gaping anuses Larry King and Montel Williams, along with their production teams, taken to task over the theatrical deceptions over which they preside?
The reason Sylvia Browne and all her lying "psychic" colleagues are so financially successful is because the media loves them. Every now and again, when something disgusting happens as did recently on the Montel Williams show, a few media people express some sham of disapproval. But it smacks of a damage limitation on the part of CNN and the like, and when it's all died down the old hag Brown will be back being interviewed by the sycophantic Larry King. And where will, that be? Why, on CNN of course!
Posted by: pv | January 24, 2007 at 02:29 PM
Mind you, I see Randi is on CNN tonight (January 24), and I've seen a condemnation of Sylvia Brown on Fox's website (Fox normally swallow some of the most imbecilic stuff out, like Joe Newman's never-materialising "miracle machines". So perhaps there's hope for at least the big American networks.
Let's just hope the UK networks will follow suit: show me evidence, or I show you my great big pink, hairy rear end!
Posted by: Big Al | January 24, 2007 at 04:09 PM
Minor factual point - the TV series "Medium" is based on Allison Dubois, not Sylvia Browne. Also "Ghost Whisperer" is based on James Van Praagh.
Posted by: Skeptico | January 24, 2007 at 05:10 PM
Wait a minute, James Van Praagh? Cause I've seen the pictures, and he doesn't look anything like Jennifer Love-Hewitt. I thought he looked more like a neanderthal version of John Stossel. Apparently I was mistaken.
Who knew?
Posted by: Akusai | January 24, 2007 at 06:55 PM
Very true Akusai. Just one of the many differences between the TV program and reality.
Posted by: Skeptico | January 24, 2007 at 10:39 PM
Sorry, Skeptico:( My bad on "Medium", but the principle's the same.
Posted by: Big Al | January 25, 2007 at 05:59 AM
Skeptico, you made it into the UK Guardian blog!
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/news/archives/2007/01/22/kidnapped_boys_tv_ordeal.html
Posted by: HCN | January 25, 2007 at 12:16 PM