Talk:Hoax
From Academic Kids
While I and I'm sure a large number of people believe that crop circles are hoaxes, and indeed various methods of making crops circles, without supernatural or alien intervention, have been demonstrated, I think there are a significant number of people who believe that they are not hoaxed. So, I'm not sure crop circles belong in the proven hoax section. Mintguy
Is it fair to call the War of the Worlds broadcast a hoax? It was a dramatic presentation, it was not intended to get anyone to believe it was true... --Dante Alighieri 19:45 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
No responses for two weeks, so I took it out. I'm archiving it here. --Dante Alighieri 20:00 11 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- The 1938 War of the Worlds radio broadcast by Orson Welles
Dante, The War of the Worlds broadcast was widely regarded as a hoax in its day and in the literature since. While those who listened to it in its entirety would realize that it was theater, the broadcast was written and produced deliberately to fool the casual listener who tuned in partway through the broadcast. Once the broadcast was well under way, there were few clues to the listener to indicate it was fiction, and there were no announcements or disclaimers to allay the fears of listeners. I suggest that it be added again. It surely ranks as one of, if not the, greatest media hoax of all time.
Also, if you search with google, there are many sites on the web that consider it a hoax.
Kat 03:01 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- It's already been re-added, and it now has some context which marks it as distinct from your garden-variety hoax. --Dante Alighieri 06:03 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- Regardless of what sites listed on Google say, the War of the Worlds broadcast was not a true hoax. "Hoax" implies malicious intent; in this case there was none. The broadcasters had no idea the public would be so gullible. - Hephaestos 06:07 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- A hoax certainly implies intent to deceive, and that was completely absent from the Welles broadcast... -- Someone else 06:10 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- Hmm, I understand that the "no intent to deceive" response was given by Welles and others involved in the broadcast when the resulting bruhaha began. But it really is a doubtful thesis; Welles certainly intended to snooker a few people, though perhaps he was surprised by the extent of the response. I studied it some back in the 1970s and don't have my notes any more, but I remember that there was little doubt as to the intent of the broadcast.
| Contents |
Criminal charges?
An interesting subject for this article would be what criminal charges one would face for a hoax around the world. Or, more accurately, what sorts of criminal charges have been used in the past against hoaxters. My guess would be 95% go without any sort of criminal charges, and once in a while there's a charge of fraud or something like inciting to riot. Tempshill 19:47, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
George Bush National Guard letters
Under "Proven Hoaxes" there were separate entries for "George Bush National Guard letters" and "Killian memos." I think these are the same thing. "George Bush National Guard letters" did not link to anything, so I took it out. "Killian memos" leads to an article on the subject. TomTheHand 01:44, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
Shroud of Turin
I've moved Shroud_of_Turin from Proven Hoaxes to Possible Hoaxes. As far as I know there's still debate about the authenticity of the Shroud. TomTheHand 06:26, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
Fraudulent hoaxes
We should merge some content from Hoax and Fraud to Fraudulent hoax. --TheSamurai 23:29, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
probable hoaxes
I have some objections to the probable hoax section. Unless there is evidence to support that something might be a hoax, its just the author's opinion. For instance, Whitley Streiber's Communion is listed as a probable hoax for no reason I can discern other than that he claims to be abducted by UFOs. You can't prove a negative, (like you can't say "there is no god" or "there are no aliens". You can doubt these things but you can't prove them absolutely. Unless there are tapes of Whitley Streiber sleeping in his bed all night long during nights he's claimed to be abducted, you can't prove he hasn't been, you can only doubt him. Also, if he's just hallucinating, it isn't a hoax, it's a mental disorder.
If there is some evidence suggesting something might be a hoax but it is inconclusive, then maybe you could argue for listing as a probable hoax, but even so, it shows an obvious bias. I'm tempted to remove the listing, but I'm still new here so that seems a bit presumptuous. Anyone have any comments? Reverend Distopia
No responses for several weeks, so I'm going to move the link to possible hoaxes. Anyone who wishes to put Whitley Streiber's Communion back on probable hoaxes, feel free to do so, but please give a good reason for it. There's no evidence here whatsoever to prove it is or isn't a hoax. At best its a possible hoax and not a probable hoax. The shroud of Turin is listed as a possible hoax and there's evidence to back up the claim that it's a hoax, whereas, so far, no one has shown any evidence that Streiber is making this up. Reverend Distopia
