CNN regurgitating UFO stories

[Ernie M]

On 24 Nov 2008,
on the front page of CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/)
you can click on the “Other News” link for:
UFO in sight, then ‘pfft--it was gone (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/11/24/obrien.aliens.not.just.crazy.cnn)

and watch the video called:
Alien believers among us 4:07
Source: CNN
Added On November 24, 2008
"Miles O’Brien reports on the range of credible people who have experiences with UFO’s."

CNN regurgitates misleading information about the so-called “Phoenix Lights” and other UFO stories. CNN included “credible” people of power-positions into the story, like a former Arizona Governor, a former US Air Force pilot, and yes (Edgar Mitchell again...) a former US Astronaut. I guess the idea was that “credible” power-people aren’t subject to misinterpreting what they saw.

Perhaps Miles O’Brien didn’t review the following articles?

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-05-21.html
The Phoenix Lights Explained (Again)
by Tony Ortega

http://www.csicop.org/si/2008-04/radford.html
The Mysterious Phoenix Lights
by Benjamin Radford

If CNN is supposed to be “The most trusted name in news,” how come they seem to pass off previously debunked information as "real?"

[Astrophotographer]

There is nothing new here. Since when has the media ever being openly honest in their reporting of a subject. Too often, their own personal bias enters or they are in the business of making news. Nobody wants to hear likely explanations. They want to hear about "mysterious" objects that might be alien spaceships. They also want people to see the future, tell their fortunes, speak to the dead, report about bigfoot.... etc. etc. Man bites dog gets headlines and attention from readers.

[godless dave]

If CNN is supposed to be “The most trusted name in news,” how come they seem to pass off previously debunked information as "real?"

Ratings and keeping advertisers happy, the same basis for every decision made by every commercial news network.

[Ernie M]

Yet another CNN "UFO" video has been added Tuesday, 25 Nov 2008

Roswell revisited 4:34
"Miles O'Brien visits the site of an alleged flying saucer crash."
Source: CNN
Added on November 25, 2008
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/11/25/obrien.roswell.revisited.cnn

This short video seems rather strong for the "believer" side, and thin on facts.
I wouldn't call this accurate investigative journalism.

[Mooncalf]

And our local "most accurate weather team" overestimated 6-8 inches of snowfall last December by at least 5.95 inches.


News has always used human interest stories as filler.

You might be more understanding if you had to produce a show.

I find myself happier and my bloodpressure proper, if I don't watch the news... especially the 24hr news.

[LarianLeQuella]

*sigh*

Why is it that a supposedly "respectable news" organization will approach this on the side of woo? I must agree with you Mooncalf, avoiding the media is probably best.

[Kilaak Kommander]

Doesn't bother me much. The world is more interesting with woo. It's nice to be reminded that it's still alive and well.

[LarianLeQuella]

Interesting? http://whatstheharm.net/ Sure, we can call it interesting, but some of those folks may disagree with you. ;)

[Astrophotographer]

This short video seems rather strong for the "believer" side, and thin on facts.
I wouldn't call this accurate investigative journalism.

I couldn't agree more. It appears they acquired all their information from the Roswell UFO museum. They even confused a video from the 1994 AF press conference and linked it to the 1997 report. Then they interview Don Schmitt, who has been discredited several times and grossly exaggerated his resume years ago in order to impress fellow UFO investigators. My favorite part of the video is when they repeated what I call "Roswell myth No. 15", which is the USAF keeps changing their story:

This is a myth generated by a lot of individuals who have never read any of the reports issued by the USAF and therefore, think they keep changing their story. In reality, the Air Force never has changed its official story for what was found on the Foster Ranch. However, according to this myth, the USAF has changed it four times. They are:

Crashed flying disc
Weather balloon
Project Mogul
Dummies

The first item was not even an official USAF (then the USAAF) statement. It was a press release issued under the authority of a local commander based on what they thought they had recovered. The first OFFICIAL statement was that of General Ramey, who stated they had found weather balloon equipment. That was the official version for almost fifty years. In 1994, because of an investigation by the GAO, the USAF conducted an investigation into the matter and stated that the identification of the material as weather balloon equipment was correct. However, they added that the source of this equipment was from a cluster of balloons flown by a team of New York University engineers in connection with a top secret project called MOGUL. Ramey had correctly identified what was found but he may or may not have known the source. The USAF had just identified the source. In 1997, the USAF issued another report concerning what may have produced the alien body stories and specifically addressed the tall tales of Glenn Dennis. However, the USAF never changed what they had found in 1994. They STILL STATED that the source of the debris on the Brazel ranch was from the NYU project. So, the USAF NEVER changed their story (unless you include the initial report of a flying crashed disc which was a misidentification). They only added more information for those concerned. To summarize:

RAAF reports they found a crashed disc (but what was a flying disc? See myth #1)
General Ramey at Fort Worth points out that what had been found was a weather balloon and RAWIN target.
In 1994, the USAF states that the weather balloon and RAWIN target were CORRECTLY identified by General Ramey and Irving Newton. However, they clarified that it had come from one of the NYU flights out of Alamogordo, NM in conjunction with Project MOGUL. The material was still weather balloon equipment, it only clarifies that the equipment was not from a normal weather balloon.
In 1997, the USAF STILL states that the 1994 report was correct but that, after some further research, they felt that reports of alien bodies (which was not addressed in 1994) could be reasonably explained. They determined that it was not entirely implausible for some of the reports to be from witnesses to dummies in parachutes being dropped from extremely high altitudes during the 1950s. Other reports could have been generated by several other incidents that occurred on or around RAAF/Walker AFB during the same decade.

From my website : http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/Rosmyths.htm

Had they done just a bit of research beyond the Roswell museum, they could have gotten their facts right. However, man bites dog won out on this day. Congratulations CNN and Miles O'Brien (who is called CNN's chief technology and environment correspondent). You were more interested in selling a UFO story than actually performing serious research. It makes me wonder about all the other stories he has "researchred".

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I couldn't agree more. It appears they acquired all their information from the Roswell UFO museum. They even confused a video from the 1994 AF press conference and linked it to the 1997 report. Then they interview Don Schmitt, who has been discredited several times and grossly exaggerated his resume years ago in order to impress fellow UFO investigators. My favorite part of the video is when they repeated what I call "Roswell myth No. 15", which is the USAF keeps changing their story:

This is a myth generated by a lot of individuals who have never read any of the reports issued by the USAF and therefore, think they keep changing their story. In reality, the Air Force never has changed its official story for what was found on the Foster Ranch. However, according to this myth, the USAF has changed it four times. They are:

Crashed flying disc
Weather balloon
Project Mogul
Dummies

The first item was not even an official USAF (then the USAAF) statement. It was a press release issued under the authority of a local commander based on what they thought they had recovered. The first OFFICIAL statement was that of General Ramey, who stated they had found weather balloon equipment. That was the official version for almost fifty years. In 1994, because of an investigation by the GAO, the USAF conducted an investigation into the matter and stated that the identification of the material as weather balloon equipment was correct. However, they added that the source of this equipment was from a cluster of balloons flown by a team of New York University engineers in connection with a top secret project called MOGUL. Ramey had correctly identified what was found but he may or may not have known the source. The USAF had just identified the source. In 1997, the USAF issued another report concerning what may have produced the alien body stories and specifically addressed the tall tales of Glenn Dennis. However, the USAF never changed what they had found in 1994. They STILL STATED that the source of the debris on the Brazel ranch was from the NYU project. So, the USAF NEVER changed their story (unless you include the initial report of a flying crashed disc which was a misidentification). They only added more information for those concerned. To summarize:

RAAF reports they found a crashed disc (but what was a flying disc? See myth #1)
General Ramey at Fort Worth points out that what had been found was a weather balloon and RAWIN target.
In 1994, the USAF states that the weather balloon and RAWIN target were CORRECTLY identified by General Ramey and Irving Newton. However, they clarified that it had come from one of the NYU flights out of Alamogordo, NM in conjunction with Project MOGUL. The material was still weather balloon equipment, it only clarifies that the equipment was not from a normal weather balloon.
In 1997, the USAF STILL states that the 1994 report was correct but that, after some further research, they felt that reports of alien bodies (which was not addressed in 1994) could be reasonably explained. They determined that it was not entirely implausible for some of the reports to be from witnesses to dummies in parachutes being dropped from extremely high altitudes during the 1950s. Other reports could have been generated by several other incidents that occurred on or around RAAF/Walker AFB during the same decade.

From my website : http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/Rosmyths.htm (http://home.comcast.net/%7Etprinty/UFO/Rosmyths.htm)

Had they done just a bit of research beyond the Roswell museum, they could have gotten their facts right. However, man bites dog won out on this day. Congratulations CNN and Miles O'Brien (who is called CNN's chief technology and environment correspondent). You were more interested in selling a UFO story than actually performing serious research. It makes me wonder about all the other stories he has "researchred".

Nice, thorough analysis on your site. Bookmarked! :)

Any chance of someone calling CNN and Miles O'Brien on this show? I'd love to see what they have to say to an e-mail.

[MattusMaximus]

Must have been a slow news day. Anything to fill the "news-hole" :rolleyes:

[CFLarsen]

Avoiding the media is the worst thing to do.

We can't spread critical thinking and skepticism by living in a cave.

[godless dave]

I don't advocate avoiding the media. I do advocate avoiding television "news".

[Lonewulf]

I don't advocate avoiding the media. I do advocate avoiding television "news".

Actually, on this case, I agree with CFLarsen, although "living in a cave" is a bit over the top.

I'm all for finding sources of the most unbiased forms of media there are (NPR is good for that, IMO), but I think it's also important to know what the television "news" is showing... so that one can know what information is being distributed to others.

Of course, coming here to the JREF and visiting threads like this one can suffice...

[Bikewer]

Many have commented on the pressure these 24/7 news agencies feel to keep "something" on the air at all times.
CNN may do a decent job of covering "breaking news" (though the news often consists of helicopter footage as they orbit the disaster du jour, and constant comment along the lines of "as soon as we have more information....")
However, articles such as the above must be pre-approved, produced, packaged....
Obviously for entertainment value rather than news.
Seems the producers could just as easily put out a more balanced and skeptical look at such things, like mentioning the tourist-driven interest in keeping the Roswell "incident" alive.... Of course, reporting like that would take more time, more digging, and result in more annoyed sources. Much easier to take some canned footage and interview the proprietor of the museum...

I've come to rely on sources like NPR for most of my news coverage. Even the big networks' morning shows are heavily skewed to presenting footage from their own programs as news.
Putting up Leno monologues as political commentary is pretty lame....

[CFLarsen]

We can only speak intelligently about the quality of television news if we observe the news closely.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

We can only speak intelligently about the quality of television news if we observe the news closely.

If you volunteer to watch Nancy Grace as she continues her six month marathon to find Little Caylee, I'll volunteer to watch CBC Newsworld. :D

[Ernie M]

In three days, CNN has posted three UFO-related videos with Miles O’Brien.

I’m seeing a pattern, I wonder if there will be more videos in the days to come?

Captions in quotes are how they appear on cnn.com

24 Nov 2008
Alien believers among us (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/11/24/obrien.aliens.not.just.crazy.cnn)
"Miles O’Brien reports on the range of credible people who have experiences with UFO’s."

25 Nov 2008
Roswell revisited (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/11/25/obrien.roswell.revisited.cnn)
"Miles O'Brien visits the site of an alleged flying saucer crash."

26 Nov 2008
Man describes alien encounter (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2008/11/26/am.obrien.aliens.abducted.cnn)
“Does alien abduction really happen, or is it the product of vivid imaginations? CNN’s Miles O’Brien reports.”

Here’s part of what the Man describes alien encounter video includes:
‘Mark’ believes he was abducted by aliens several times.
Miles: In “Whackyville,” the Greys take Mark to an exam room in their spacecraft, and hand him a fetus. Do you have any idea what they wanted when they gave you the fetus?

If CNN wants to report items with no credible proof, why don’t they add a tab called “Fantasy” or “Pop-culture Garbage” or some other relevant name?

For Astrophotographer:
Nice, detailed Website, including coverage of Popular Roswell myths (http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/Rosmyths.htm)

For Gord_in_Toronto:
Yes, I wish someone would contact CNN and Miles O’Brien to ask questions about truth in journalism, and basic fact-checking that’s done/required before airing a story.

For Lonewulf and others interested in investigative journalism:
There is a relatively new, investigative on-line news source called ProPublica (http://www.propublica.org/)
although they don’t produce their own videos.

[MattusMaximus]

If you volunteer to watch Nancy Grace as she continues her six month marathon to find Little Caylee, I'll volunteer to watch CBC Newsworld. :D

Nancy Grace - the Sylvia Browne of the news :rolleyes:

Seriously though, I agree with Claus on this. As repulsive as it might be sometimes, I think we do need to monitor the media as best we can.

[LarianLeQuella]

Is there a good way to contact Mr. O'Brien and his cohorts at CNN and let them know they are in woo territory as opposed to journalism? I post comments on CNN all the time, but I feel almost as if I am just pissing in the wind...

[godless dave]

*sigh*

Why is it that a supposedly "respectable news" organization will approach this on the side of woo?

Because they're not a respectable news organization and never have been.

[MattusMaximus]

Is there a good way to contact Mr. O'Brien and his cohorts at CNN and let them know they are in woo territory as opposed to journalism? I post comments on CNN all the time, but I feel almost as if I am just pissing in the wind...

Try this. (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form4.html?14)

[godless dave]

We can only speak intelligently about the quality of television news if we observe the news closely.

At this point in my life I feel I have more than enough data to make a judgement.

[Sherman Bay]

We can only speak intelligently about the quality of television news if we observe the news closely.News? What news? It's entertainment, silly.

[CFLarsen]

Television news are always changing. Therefore, ignoring new evidence (either way) is unskeptical.

[godless dave]

Television news are always changing.

That hasn't been my experience. At least since the 1988 US election cycle, it's been all about sensationalism and superficiality, with most "reporting" consisting of paraphrasing press releases. I still tune in once in a while and the only change I notice is it's getting slightly worse.

The only exception in my experience is PBS's the News Hour with Jim Lehrer. It was OK through the mid 90s, although it suffered from a tendency to have panel "discussions" where there were only two sides and the moderator just let each side read their talking points. But starting in late 2002 with the lead up to the Iraq war they went completely into the toilet.

[Raptor Witness]

CNN may be trying to encourage the Obama Administration to release top secret data on UFO's. If so, that's a good thing. We need to see all the facts, and right now some of them are undoubtedly hidden from us.

[CFLarsen]

If it gets worse, then it changes. All the more reason to watch it.

Should we stop fighting superstition because we think it gets worse?

If we want things to change, defeatism is not the way to go.

[Drs_Res]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_17742492e5c5236a0e.png (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=14368)

[godless dave]

If it gets worse, then it changes. All the more reason to watch it.

Should we stop fighting superstition because we think it gets worse?

I didn't say stop fighting it, I said stop watching it. The fewer people who watch it the less relevant it becomes.

[Lonewulf]

I didn't say stop fighting it, I said stop watching it. The fewer people who watch it the less relevant it becomes.

The unfortunate thing is, the potential viewers that would stop watching it for rational reasons are in the minority.

[CFLarsen]

We have to know what we are fighting. We can't just guess, or think we know.

[Astrophotographer]

We need to see all the facts, and right now some of them are undoubtedly hidden from us.


Hmmm....."undoubtedly hidden...."???? Exactly what do you mean by that? A great deal of material has been released and not one bit has indicated that the government knows any more than what it has stated in the past.

[Astrophotographer]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_17742492e5c5236a0e.png (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=14368)


Actually, the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc. have released all their UFO files. Apparently, the author of the cartoon is misinformed.

[Drs_Res]

Actually, the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc. have released all their UFO files. Apparently, the author of the cartoon is misinformed.

It was the wording on the television screen that I found funny.

[GT/CS]

It was the wording on the television screen that I found funny.

Did you notice there was no mention of the NWO?

Sounds like a conspiracy to me.

[Ernie M]

Phil Plait (creator of Bad Astronomy) made a blog entry on December 3rd, 2008:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/

Scroll down the page and read:
"CNN catches the stupid"

Two key points Phil made in this blog:
1. "CNN is shutting down its science/space/tech division and absorbing it into their general editorial unit."
2. "...Miles O'Brien will be leaving CNN."

It makes for interesting reading. You should also read the accompanying "Comments."

It makes me wonder if CNN could have used, manipulated, and exploited Miles O'Brien (a talented journalist) into working on baseless stories of aliens and UFO's.

[kittynh]

They released the files... but a lot of stuff was BLACKED OUT!

all of which was understandably blacked out when I saw a few pages. Names of people, places, flight numbers....

or CONSPIRACY?

Geez... more fun for my UFO talk (in Boston Dec13th... don't miss it!)

[skepticalbeliever]

Larry King always has UFO people on his show. Somebody at CNN is obsessed with them. I think liberal people who don’t have a background in science have more of a predilection to believe in UFOs because they don't believe in God.

It is obvious that CNN has a liberal slant. You don’t see this type of stuff as much on fox news. In fact, I’ve never seen fox devote an hour to the UFO debate.