BellGab.com Archive

You all have way too high expectations of Coast to Coast AM.  If you want to learn something about science or history, audit a university lecture or read a book by someone who is an expert in the field.  Don't expect a lot of science or rationality on AM radio which is generally full of demagogues, evangelists, and mystery mongers.  If you want to be entertained, Coast to Coast is a great show for that.

There is almost nothing of educational value on the show, except in the spirit of the old adage "know thy enemy".  As a skeptic I need to keep my finger on the pulse of Americans' love of the paranormal--what's popular and why.

Don't act like it was any different with Art Bell.  Bell stated many times that the point of the show was to give people with fringe beliefs a forum to air their views without being condescending.  Bell had the same lineup of fortune tellers, conspiracy theorists, UFO enthusiasts, astrologers, medical quackery proponents, shadow people, doomsdayers, ghost hunters, and remote viewers.  I think we can all agree Richard C. Hoagland is a nutjob?  He was a regular for years when Bell was host.

To Bell and Noory's credit, they've both had on many legitimate scientists and skeptics including Michael Shermer, Joe Nickell, Michio Kaku, and most recently Brian Greene.  It's rare for a talk show host to have a guest that contradicts most of the what the show deals with.  I salute them for being willing to listen to the other side.

I think many of C2C listeners and Art Bell fans have unrealistic expectations for the show.  If you want to learn about science and history, read some books, watch some lectures online (many top universities now post their lectures on Youtube), or drop in on a university class.

Quote
Also interesting that Geography didn't addess the specific criticisms of Simple George at all: the failure to prep for the show, the lack of intelligent questions and followup questions, his obsession with telling stories about himself, etc.

All the credit Geography gives Noory is for things that are actually done by the producers.

How do you know Noory doesn't prep for the show?  In the interviews I've heard, he shows a decent background of the guest's material.  When Robert Bruce comes on, he asks astral projection questions.  When Loren Coleman comes on, he asks about lake monsters and Bigfoot.  He doesn't ask random questions most of the time. 

In fact, Noory's questions are often too specific, like "Isn't true this animal was sighted earlier this year?"  He asks a lot of Yes/No questions that reveal a good knowledge of the subject. While a Yes/No question is generally a poor interview skill because it doesn't get the interviewee talking at length, the guest knows to take this question as a cue.  Noory will often start an interview by stating the last time the guest was on, maybe years ago.  That doesn't come from memory, that comes from research.  Quick prep, yes, but prep nonetheless.

Noory likes to tell personal stories.  So does every talk radio host.  You think Art Bell didn't tell personal stories?  We know tons about his personal life, his cats, his wives, his son, and his Philippine adventures from his story-telling.  Neither Bell nor Noory's stories bother me at all because, like you all, I am curious about the host.  Noory usually tells stories to augment a guest's point, such as his experience with OBE when interviewing Robert Bruce.  Bell did the exact same thing when he interviewed Bruce.

I don't see how the credit I give Noory for being a nice host to callers and guests and allowing them to talk at length is the responsibility of the producer.  A producer schedules guests with input from the host and handles the business side.

It feels strange as a Shermer-esque skeptic to be defending Noory, but unfair treatment is unfair treatment, regardless who it happens to.  Many members have suggested I start a new thread.  I'm happy to continue this discussion in a new thread if the moderators want to create one and move my posts and members' relevant replies to the new thread.

I also love Lionel Fanthorpe, who Noory calls the "greatest storyteller ever born".  He's not far off.  Fanthorpe's British accent and voice are absolutely fantastic, and he has a gift for telling stories.

QuoteIt's a free world.  People are entitled to their personal views and sentiments.  Welcome to the world.

I don't appreciate this condescending attitude, "welcoming" me to a world you know I'm very much a part of.  I never suggested censoring you.  I'm defending Noory against the hyperbole from many posters.  How can you start your rebuttal with a statement upholding the right of personal views, when other replies heap personal insults on me for daring to like Noory?  For example, Jasmine opines:

QuoteAnd quite frankly, anyone who claims to be a bona fide fan of Noory is truly not dealing with a full deck, and is situated on the lower rung of the human food chain.

Why not tell Jasmine everyone is entitled to their own opinion?

I'll reply to the arguments that Noory has significantly decreased C2C's educational value from the Art Bell days and that Noory sounds unintelligent and is a poor interviewer.

First, Oversoul and Jasmine mentioned they listened to C2C for its educational value.  I have also learned a lot from some programs such as those with Shermer, Nickell, or Kaku.  But when I tune in, I expect to take things with many grains of salt, and simply laugh off a lot of stuff.  I think the very nature of C2C as a forum for all things weird puts it behind the eight ball for me in terms of educational value.  My epistemology is to trust traditional authorities such as academics over lone wolf authors/researchers which comprise most of the C2C lineup.  But I understand many people strongly distrust traditional authorities, and not without reason.

Even if you tune in for good information and put your trust in the guests, there is still much to like in Noory's programs.  Since he gives guests a lot of leeway, a good guest can speak their mind and go where he/she wants.  Whether it's a skeptic, bigfoot researcher, medical quackery promoter, ancient mysteries researcher, astral projection guru, the-times-are-bad-and-getting-worse prophet, numerologist, astrologer, or conspiracy theorist, at the end the night you will know that guest's thoughts.  Has any guest ever ended a three hour interview feeling they didn't get enough time to talk?  With Ian Punnet, that's a real problem because he talks too much and gives too little time to the guest.  It seems like we all agree that, for better or worse, Noory gives a lot of time to guests.

Noory has a huge range of guests on, for better or worse.  On the worse end is all the medical quackery proponents and financial doomsdayers who might very well cause real harm.  On the better end is all the skeptics, scientists, and writers who don't fit the audience of a paranormal-themed program and probably engender a lot of hate fast-blasts to C2C.  I'm guessing Shermer's atheism and skepticism pissed of a ton of listeners, but Noory has had him on multiple times.  Noory hosted two debates with Shermer: one with Roswell promoter Stanton Friedman and another with three parapsychologists, one after another.

I didn't intend to bring up some negatives of Art Bell's hosting days because, as I said before, he was skilled, entertaining, and innovative in the radio field.  He hosted some legendary programs that I still listen to.  I bring up some negatives now only to shrink the purported gap in talent between Bell and Noory.

UnscreenedCaller accused Noory of being dangerous for having on some proponents of medical quackery.  I'm sympathetic to this argument because I know the great harm inflicted by pursuing medical quackery and related scams.  One example if Noory's dual interviews with Andrew Wakesfield, the lead author of the infamous MMR vaccines-cause-autism report.  However, because of C2C's reputation as a paranormal-themed show denies the credibility to guests that would be granted if Wakesfield appeared at length and in a favorable light on NBC or CBS.  If someone is predisposed to believe Wakesfield, then they are going to find out about his views one or another, and appearing on C2C is hardly a ringing endorsement.

Art Bell interviewed plenty of pseudo-scientists pushing medical quackery.  He interviewed Lorraine Day (alternative cancer treatment), Wayne Green (AIDS denialist), and Ronald Klatz (anti-aging quackery).  And what about all the anti-government conspiracy theorists which encouraged the growth of anti-government militias in the 1990s and contributed to an atmosphere of government-hating paranoia?  The stand-off at Ruby Ridge, Branch Dividian Siege, and Oklahoma City bombing all had anti-government paranoia at their roots, paranoia fanned by Bell and his guests.

In conclusion, the variety of guests Noory brings on, and the freedom he gives them to talk, ensures C2C retains a lot of educational content for those who looking for education on a paranormal-themed radio show.  If your criteria of a poor host is that they host "dangerous" guests, then Bell is as guilty as Noory.

Second, the number one criticism of Noory seems to be that he sounds unintelligent and asks poor questions.  As I said in my first post, Noory can be quirky and random sometimes, but it's light-hearted as he tries to inject some humor into the conversation. 

Regarding his interview skills, they're inferior to Bell but not to the extent that it prevents enjoyment.  I've recorded many entertaining shows hosted by Noory.  Examples include the interviews with Robert Bruce (astral projection), Michael Shermer and Joe Nickell (skeptics), Neil Arnold (A-Z of Zooform), Gregory Little (Edgar Cayce, Atlantis, Bahamas), Loren Coleman (cryptids), Lionel Fanthorpe (British storyteller), and John DeSalvo (pyramids).

A common criticism is he mispronounces words.  I listen a lot and don't recall an unusual amount of mispronounced words.  One that comes to mind was in his interview with Joe Nickell when he called the Shroud of Turin the Shroud of Urine, but quickly corrected himself.  If he is mispronouncing words, it's not distracting me.

Michael Shermer- His full program many years ago with Art Bell first turned me on to skepticism as a field.  While his voice is a little annoying to listen to, and he is too smug at times, it's great to hear him debunk all the topics on C2C.

Joe Nickell- Another skeptic but very different from Shermer.  Nickell's researched a lot of specific UFOs, haunted houses, relics, and other mysteries.  He's slower and more methodical in his speaking than Shermer, and more of a story-teller.

Robert Bruce- The astral projection guru from Australia.  While I'm skeptical of the existence of astral projection and all the things Bruce claims you can do with it, his voice and speaking style are pleasant and engaging.  I love Aussie and British accents.

Ian Punnett is my least favorite host after Bell, Noory, and Knapp in-spite of several good traits.  He is the most well-read and intelligent sounding of all the hosts.  However, he talks too much and laughs at his own annoying jokes.  He seems too smug and proud of his own cleverness.  Talking too much is a classic mistake of interviewers.  I remember an interview with Daniel Pinchbeck in which his questions would go on forever.  Even before Pinchbeck spoke a single word, Punnett gave a minutes-long monologue introducing him, then jumping right to a question.  No!  Let the guest the introduce the topic and talk as much as possible!

Punnett's radio voice doesn't sound that great to me, but that's personal preference so I can't hold that against him.

I'm a new member who joined to defend George Noory.  I think he is a much better host than most other members give him credit for, and that you all give far too much credit to Art Bell as skeptical host.

I've been listening to Coast to Coast AM off-and-on for about eight years.  I've heard hundreds of shows from Noory, Bell, and my least favorite host, Ian Punnet.  Like most of you, I don't listen to C2C to be educated, I listen to be entertained late at night, and get a feeling for all the weird stuff out there.  If I want to be educated, I'll listen to lectures by skeptics Michael Shermer, Joe Nickell, David Aaronovich, and other legitimate seekers-of-the-truth.  That's why it doesn't bother me that Noory fails to challenge his guests, because who really cares?  Does anyone really consider the validity of shadow people, Bigfoot, cryptids, time travel, astral projection, or whatever is on each night?  I'm guessing most of you would say no, but it's a fun program nonetheless.

Noory is friendly and treats his callers with respect unlike other talk radio hosts who treat callers as morons to be shouted down.  Noory can be quirky and random at times, but it's always lighthearted.  I remember he claimed that, "a hand just grabbed my leg under the table."  It was so random and implausible that I shook my head and laughed, but didn't pour vitriol on him like so many posters on this forum.  I've also heard many of the non-sequiters documented in this thread but laughed rather than got angry at them.  Noory lets guests talk at length about almost anything, and I like that.  If it goes off-topic, so be it, as long as it's interesting.

Most posters here give too much credit to Art Bell as a skeptical host.  Remember that his goal for the show was to have a forum where people could discuss their unusual views without ridicule.  He poked and prodded guests more than Noory, but not to the extent that it really challenged guests.  There were many times when he came to the guest's defense when challenged by a caller.  For example, anyone remember Ray Santilli of the Alien Autopsy Film?  I have it on my computer.  Callers were bringing up discrepancies in like the latex gloves and Bell challenged the caller, "How do you know they're--?" Or the famous Malachi Martin interview?  Bell was totally engrossed in Martin and never challenged him.  Or the Bigfoot hunter in Texas?  Not one challenging word, it was a love-fest between Bell and "Bugs."  And don't forget the dozens of times Art had Richard Hoagland on.  Art may have prodded Hoagland more than Noory, but he kept inviting Hoagland again and again, even after Hoagland's claims got increasingly preposterous.

Art was a fantastic host, pioneer, and much friendlier than most talk radio hosts.  He created a hugely entertaining program.  But he wasn't Michael Shermer or James Randi or Joe Nickell.  He asked softball, leading questions 95% of the time, just like Noory.  Art had a deeper, more distinctive voice that is more pleasant to listen to than Noory's or Punnett's, in my opinion.  But that doesn't justify the hatred toward Noory.  I enjoy Noory's programs as long he has an interesting guest on.