"What Are UFOs?" — I'm giving NOVA the benefit of the doubt... but it's not looking good.
The easiest thing in the world for a TV producer is to make a show that "raises questions" and suggests maybe the supernatural is real. It's much harder to make a useful show.
This is the free Monday edition of my newsletter separating bullshit from reality in pop culture. Mondays are free to all; paid subscribers get an addition Thursday episode as well. I hope you find it entertaining and worth your $8!
When I wrote The UFO Movie (2023) I worked my ass off for nearly a year, crafting the best, most persuasive, and most hopeful film I could. I knew from long experience that audiences are generally hostile to the idea that UFOs are not alien spaceships, so I wanted to leverage that into getting them interested in how aliens might be able to get here. Well, shit, they can’t; it’s those pesky laws of nature like relativity. But that’s not the end of the story. How might they try? What should we look for? They’re probably out there; and even if they can’t get here, we do have a sliver of an opportunity to meet them — if only virtually.
The film resounded very well with audiences, even being featured by the SETI Institute on their movie night, and having it turn out to be their most attended movie night ever — which, for me, was the pinnacle of acceptance by the most critical possible audience. It’s had some 10-15 million views on streaming. It’s taken four top prizes at film festivals, plus many more finalists, honorable mentions, and official selections. I couldn’t be more pleased.
But I earned it, through very hard work and all original content. My goal was science communication and making the world a smarter place, not clicks and views for profit. If I had wanted to do that, I would have taken the easy path — I would have interviewed today’s top UFO personalities who promote alien visitation. I would have had them tell the same old stories we’ve been hearing for 20, 50, 75 years. I would have told the audience “You decide!” But I’m not willing to do that. It’s already been done to death, and it contributes nothing.
So I was understandably dismayed last week when I received an email from a very nice fellow in public affairs at PBS, promoting the newest episode of the storied and very long-running TV series NOVA. Season 52 (!!), episode 1: “What Are UFOS?” A snip:
“What Are UFOs?” features many fascinating and differing perspectives including firsthand accounts from former Lt. US Navy and F/A-18F pilot Ryan Graves, whose squadron witnessed the famed “Gimbal” — the first UAP video to be declassified by the Department of Defense — aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt off the coast of Jacksonville, FL in 2015. Graves was also the first active-duty military pilot to come forward about regular sightings of UFOs. Graves is available for media interviews, along with others featured in the film, including the special’s director, Oscar-nominated filmmaker Terri Randall, if of interest.
You may recognize the name Ryan Graves — he’s best known as one of the three (ahem) “whistleblowers” from the infamous July 2023 UFO hearing; and is somewhat less well known as a very longtime UFO personality and promoter of alien visitation. At his very lowest point, he shared the stage with lifelong hoaxer Jaime Maussan to present some plaster dolls to the Mexican Congress as proof of alien beings.
This is not a good look for NOVA, to uplift one of the very least credible alien visitation promoters to give the supposedly “science-based” view of the UFO phenomenon.
However, I’m giving the show the benefit of the doubt until I can actually watch it. Perhaps this PR blurb was just to excite the masses with promises of alien discoveries, and get them to tune in. One of the top reasons I’m giving it the benefit of the doubt is the assurance from my friend Mick West — who also appears in the show — that the producers were very interested in presenting the science (West said so not just in this tweet, but more in the resulting thread):
In their full press release, NOVA/GBS names more cast members besides Graves. They include one more UFO wooist and eight legit science experts (including West). The writer/director Terri Randall does not have any pseudoscience credits that I could easily find, but she does have plenty of NOVA chops.
You might wonder why I’m still trepidatious and not all-in. Part of it is because NOVA usually covers uncontroversial topics such as climate change and habitat loss, subjects that the PBS audience is usually hungry for. If they’re just going to pander to whatever’s popular, “UFOs are actually space aliens” is about as popular as a subject can get. And it is so easy to make a show that simply regurgitates pop UFO stories and suggests that they’re mysterious — stories like what Ryan Graves is likely to tell. You decide!
I pray to the FSM that I’m wrong. NOVA S52E01 “What Are UFOs?” airs January 22, 2025 on PBS.
The last time NOVA did something like this they ended up being sued by Bud Hopkins and lost. Served them right too. They were way too harsh on him and his patients. IIRC I think they claimed he'd said things he had never uttered (as if his views weren't already more than enough to work with). He was actually very open to criticism and willing to work with us on my BBC film. I, in turn, was completely open with him about our skeptical and science-based exploration of his field: alien abductions.
I hope things have not now swung too far the other way at NOVA.
Mick West should not accept anything said to him at face value. Ever. Documentary-making is infested with charming researchers, producers, and executives who will say anything to gain co-operation then do the complete opposite of what they've promised. It can be hard though when there isn't enough time for every contribution filmed and some interviews get reduced to almost nothing or get squeezed out entirely. That's when the producer should call the interviewee and apologise. They rarely do.
I would ask if Mick West has seen the final edited version of the NOVA show. I am aware of colleagues who were interviewed for some segment (related to climate change) and felt the filming was fair and reasonable; only to see the final edited cut and find that what was shown was anything but balanced and reasonable. Of course you just don't know until you see what is aired.