They see dead people—or do they? An investigation of television mediums: the hosts' charm and style, a pliable audience conditioned to readily overlook misses, and some judicious editing of the videotape are all that's really necessary to explain the seemingly impressive results of TV shows like John Edward's Crossing Over and James Van Praagh's Beyond

John Edward MaGee Jr. (known as John Edward) and James Van Praagh are probably the two most famous mediums in the United States today. Their shows Crossing Over and Beyond, respect were both running in the fall and winter of 2002--2003. Both syndicated shows had their host speaking with (or "reading") audiences (or "sitters") and claiming to make connections with the deceased friends and/or family of the audience members. Some of the shows featured readings of celebrities or individuals with special stories to tell.

Both mediums enjoy considerable success. Van Praagh sells lots of books and has a number of celebrities as clients. Edward, also, hawks books, and has been on the air since June of 2000. Both men continue to play to large audiences around the country. Even SKEPTICAL INQUIRER has included articles about them. (1)

Last August, when Van Praagh started taping Beyond a few blocks from the Center for Inquiry West in Hollywood, our homegrown Independent Investigations Group (IIG) sprang into action. (The IIG consists of a dedicated group of inquirers who participate with CFI-West staff in hands-on investigations.)

Even some skeptics seemed to be impressed with the mediums' on-camera abilities, and speculated about why they seemed so successful. Were they getting "hot reads" (using information gotten prior to the taping) through audience microphones, audience plants, or through production research? Was there some trick we weren't aware of helping these two look so accurate? Would the tapings we witnessed differ from the fully edited, aired shows? We attempted to find out.

Hot Reading

James Van Praagh

Several IIG members attended two separate Beyond tapings, descending in groups of seven or eight to the studio after a briefing at CFI--West. We split up into smaller groups with our well-hidden recording gear, and went to work.

Before the actual tape date, a number of us who had requested tickets received phone calls from Van Praagh's production people asking who we wanted to contact and what our story was. These calls seemed to be searching for candidates for the more intense, one-on-one readings Van Praagh included in each show.

On the day of the tapings, we split up in order to have a better chance of spotting plants in line as the audience waited outside the studio. We all signed fake names on the voluminous release form, and engaged in conversations about fictitious friends and relatives. If any of these stories made their way into a reading, we'd know the information had been obtained somewhere in or near the studio.

Upon entering the studio, we noticed standard audience microphones hanging from the ceiling, and speakers placed along the floors. We also monitored both Van Praagh's and his warm-up woman's pre-show conversations. That proved to be interesting.

While phone-interviewing audience members might be a conduit of information to Van Praagh, it's also consistent with the best interest of the producer trying to find compelling content. Indeed, Van Praagh's in-studio readings were so unimpressive that our suspicions of hot reading were lowered. If he had his researchers gleaning spicy tidbits for his readings, they weren't doing a very good job, for he often struggled in his efforts.

Some of the remote one-on-one segments were more impressive, but those generally took place in the sitter's homes where many clues to his or her life might be noticeable. We don't know if producers leaked information to Van Praagh or not, and we never saw raw footage of what went on at the remote tapings. Editing, as I will discuss later, could have played a crucial role.

We saw no evidence of spies in line trying to draw information from people. We gave no information beyond the contact data on the release form. None of our fake names or stories turned up in readings. Before Van Praagh's taping began, loud music was played which would have made it extremely difficult to hear a conversation from the audience microphones.

Van Praagh was guilty of at least one cheat that could be considered a hot read. Before tape was rolling, he signed some books and was chatting with members of the audience. He learned during one conversation that a woman in the audience was from Italy. When the cameras were rolling, he asked who in that section was from another country. If one hadn't seen the earlier conversation, the woman raising her hand in the affirmative would have been impressive, when in fact he knew quite well what the response would be.

John Edward

I attended a taping of John Edward's Crossing Over in Queens, New York, alone in November of 2002. Crossing Over looked like a production that had a few years under its belt. There was a waiting room instead of a long line outside, the security was a little better (I had to show a real I.D.), and they seemed to run a much tighter ship, though I did get my pocket-sized digital recorder inside with no problem.

Again, there were no indications of anyone I saw collecting information. Edward, too, played music fairly loudly, making it tough to hear normal conversation. And again, none of his readings contained the kind of specific information that would raise an eyebrow of suspicion. In fact, during most of the show I witnessed, John Edward was a bad cold reader. He, too, struggled to get hits, and in one attempt shot off nearly forty guesses before finding any significant targets.