For as long as the modern paranormal field has existed, there has been a certain level of tension – between believers and sceptics, the unexplained and debunked. The last two decades or so have seen an ever-growing tidal wave of amateur sensationalised ghost hunting content on TV and social media platforms, with a seemingly endless procession of aspiring paranormal groups looking for their “big break”. These new creators are a far cry from the old school spiritualists and academics that used to populate the paranormal investigation community.
For many with a legitimate interest in the paranormal, this surge in sensationalised content is overwhelming and frustrating, and from this frustration has grown a desire for a new type of content creator that can cut through the fog of YouTube theatrics.
YouTube “debunker” channels are a relatively new phenomena, with several successful and high profile content creators entering the frame over recent years, with numerous others cropping up regularly. Their stated mission is to cut through the nonsense and hold investigators more accountable. Many attempt to do so with a mix of bluntness and humour, which has served as a cathartic relief for those that have become exasperated by the immature antics of certain YouTube ghost hunting groups.
But what happens when these critics themselves fall prey to the same kinds of bias, overconfidence, and sensationalism that they profess to oppose? As much as these debunkers might have set out to offer clarity, they themselves still operate within the same YouTube ecosystem of algorithms, subscriber counts and clickbait- an ecosystem that rewards drama and punishes nuance.
The recent controversy surrounding popular YouTube paranormal channel The Ouija Brothers – a group until now held up as setting the standard for paranormal investigation on YouTube – has brought these issues into sharp focus. Accusations of fakery, personal relationships and conflicts of interest – along with the pressure to stay relevant on social media – have revealed cracks, not just in the paranormal community but also among those that set out to critique it.
Have we placed too much stock in the word and judgment of debunkers, or is there room for a healthier, less confrontational brand of scepticism? In the coming days, I will be taking a closer look at the evolving battleground between the believers and debunkers, asking if there can possibly be a way to lower the temperature of the debate and find a sensible middle ground. Come back later for a candid exploration of how both sides can do better as we strive towards gaining a better understanding of the unknown.
Leave a Reply