CNN and That Exorcism Debate

Here's a link to Dr. Nickell's appearance on CNN with the Rev. Larson and Pastor Miller, discussing Rev. Larson's new exorcism show (which I still haven't been able to find on the SciFi Channel). I must say that I don't understand 1) why the host doesn't tell Rev. Larson not to talk over Dr. Nickell and 2) why the she doesn't introduce Dr. Nickell as "Dr. Nickell" instead of as "Joe," in the same way that she introduces the two members of the clergy as "Pastor" and "Reverend." Joe Nickell has a Ph.D. from the University of Kentucky. He's entitled to an acknowledgement of that accomplishment. Instead, all he gets is "Joe," as if he's "Average Joe." There's nothing wrong with "Average Joe," of course, but this "Joe" is Dr. Joe and the host should address him properly. Excuse me! Rudeness! as Ally McBeal's Elaine Vassall would say.

That said, I was disappointed with this discussion of exorcism. The Rev. Larson makes an appeal to eyewitness evidence. That's fine. But he doesn't seem particularly interested in eyewitness evidence that anyone else might have to contribute, and he seems to suggest that if someone hasn't been present at the particular event he is discussing, then that person has nothing of interest to say, unless that person agrees with him. Eyewitness evidence is one thing. Interpretation of that evidence is quite another.

I also discern some equal time problems here. Rev. Larson seems to talk longer than anyone else. Pastor Miller barely speaks at all. I'd like to hear what Dr. Nickell has to say, uninterrupted, for a few minutes. Incidentally, would it be too much to ask CNN to invite him back, all by himself, to discuss the issue of exorcism? Yes? Well, then, perhaps Dr. Sanjay Gupta will have him on to discuss the health issues raised by exorcisms some time, especially since this isn't the first time that CNN has featured Rev. Larson, or shown interest in the issue. See here and here.

Here's a link to Dr. Nickell's appearance on CNN with the Rev. Larson and Pastor Miller, discussing Rev. Larson's new exorcism show (which I still haven't been able to find on the SciFi Channel). I must say that I don't understand 1) why the host doesn't tell Rev. Larson not to talk over Dr. Nickell and 2) why the she doesn't introduce Dr. Nickell as "Dr. Nickell" instead of as "Joe," in the same way that she introduces the two members of the clergy as "Pastor" and "Reverend." Joe Nickell has a Ph.D. from the University of Kentucky. He's entitled to an acknowledgement of that accomplishment. Instead, all he gets is "Joe," as if he's "Average Joe." There's nothing wrong with "Average Joe," of course, but this "Joe" is Dr. Joe and the host should address him properly. Excuse me! Rudeness! as Ally McBeal's Elaine Vassall would say.

That said, I was disappointed with this discussion of exorcism. The Rev. Larson makes an appeal to eyewitness evidence. That's fine. But he doesn't seem particularly interested in eyewitness evidence that anyone else might have to contribute, and he seems to suggest that if someone hasn't been present at the particular event he is discussing, then that person has nothing of interest to say, unless that person agrees with him. Eyewitness evidence is one thing. Interpretation of that evidence is quite another.

I also discern some equal time problems here. Rev. Larson seems to talk longer than anyone else. Pastor Miller barely speaks at all. I'd like to hear what Dr. Nickell has to say, uninterrupted, for a few minutes. Incidentally, would it be too much to ask CNN to invite him back, all by himself, to discuss the issue of exorcism? Yes? Well, then, perhaps Dr. Sanjay Gupta will have him on to discuss the health issues raised by exorcisms some time, especially since this isn't the first time that CNN has featured Rev. Larson, or shown interest in the issue. See here and here.