It seems there’s a lot of evidence mounting that indicates the Ghost Hunters team may be taking some liberties with their investigations. A lot of analysis has been done since Halloween 2008 when Grant was supposedly pulled in all sorts of directions by an unseen force during the live investigation. Since then, many people have gone back to review their footage to see if their claims match the evidence. Some, are even going back to the very first episodes where they claim to have gotten some of their very best evidence.
If you have a look at these two articles over at Haunt Jaunts you’ll see several of the clips people are talking about and some questions you should consider as you watch the evidence for yourself.
Further, we have the somewhat vague but interesting comments made by former Ghost Hunters case manager Donna LaCroix. While she didn’t say any faking had taken place, she did make comment about unusual editing, that people need to think for themselves and that everyone is out to stab you in the back. Not exactly the hometown atmosphere you would expect.
It would be naïve to think that there’s not millions riding on the success of Ghost Hunters. With it’s "humble" beginnings as two blue-collar plumbers who investigate the paranormal into the now multiple franchises, with a slew of copycats, there’s big money to be made. And clearly Jason and Grant have made a few dollars along the way since we all know they bought the Spalding Inn together. There’s a lot on the line to keep people watching.
If you go back to those first episodes, Jason disputed just about every piece of evidence and said it would be hard for him to rule something as haunted unless he had conclusive proof. Now? He labels everything as having paranormal activity, skipping the use of the word, "haunted". Is the evidence any more solid? I don’t think it is.
So is the Ghost Hunter franchise taking a few shortcuts to make good television and keep people interested? As they admit, they’re dealing with something that you can’t inherently prove. Can they really be accused of faking something that most people don’t believe in anyway? Are they pulling strings and setting up scenes for the paranormal to appear? Considering the grainy green glow of the camera, how hard is it to trace something that isn’t there or have people fill in the dots to make something appear? People will believe what they want to believe. No one is actually being charged for their services, right?
Did they skip 2009’s Halloween special to let the fervor die down since everyone would be watching with hawk eyes to see if there were any shenanigans and they just didn’t want to risk it?
It seems like calling their evidence into question is not just an isolated incident anymore. Are they walking a very fine line and it’s only a matter of time?
Real evidence of creative license?
Other Articles of Interest:
- Ghost Hunters – Season 1 – Rating – Too Damn Funny!
- What happened to that Ghost Hunters Live DVD?
- What a difference a year makes … It’s time to say goodbye
- Ghost Hunters Halloween Special 2009
- Ghost Hunters Halloween Special 2009 – It’s On!
- More on Ghost Hunters Live Halloween Special
- Ghost Hunters – Live From The Stanley Hotel
- Ghost Hunters Live Halloween Event at Buffalo Central Terminal
- Independent investigation of the Spalding Inn
- What’s with all the secrecy?