Is John Edward real or fake?

I am one of those people who watch John Edward's performances with interest. Is he real? Is he fake? Not sure. I watch to see if I can catch him out - but of course, it\'s a bit hard to do with a television show. How much is cut out? How much is manipulated to make it seem like John achieves the hits when he really doesn't? I have always wanted to see a show so I can see for myself what he does.

Enter our holiday to Queensland recently. The day before we left I looked up details on the Australia Zoo, thinking my son would love to go there as he loves the Crocodile Hunter. I noticed that John Edward was performing there on the day I planned going, and mulled over the coincidence of us being at the zoo the day John was going to be performing. I decided we would definately be making the trip to the zoo.

Trust me, I went into the show sceptical - I wanted to believe, but knew that it could be entirely possible to be fooled. I intended to listen, and see what those being read gave away - a smart person could surely make conclusions based on pieces of information unwittingly given. I anticipated a show full of misses which get cut out for the television show, leaving a show full of readings that appear to be accurate.

Enter John. The first reading was a bit washed out - there didn\'t appear to be many hits. Some of the information that John gave could have been deduced from fragments of information given. When John started saying what seemed to be stereo-typical information based on a piece of information he was given, I have to say, I was disappointed - I sat there thinking - yep, John Edward is a fake. Unbelievable. People see this live and fall for it (or don't), and they cut this sort of thing out for television, fooling all of the television audience.

For the next reading, John provided information that seemed to be mostly correct. The person being read wasn\'t giving any information that could provide John with fuel; however, there were a few general statements that could be applied to many people, or changed to suit the response of the person being read.

Following readings were even more accurate, with just about all of the information that John provided being correct. The information was obscure and specific enough that it couldn\'t be generalised, and the person being read was confirming the information was correct. Most people did not provide any information - it was tending to be yes/no, and explaining the point at times (which did not tend to \'lead in\' to the next lot of information from John).

There was a reference to one lady's foot that needed attention, and she replied that she needed to get it x-rayed. I concluded that she may have been spotted limping as she moved down to stand in a clear space for the reading. However, she had no obvious limp when she moved back to her seat, although I do realise there may have been some tell-tale sign that the crew circulating through the audience could have picked up and transmitted to John. This is an example of information that I treated with caution, knowing it could have been deduced.

There were some instances where John insisted that he was right when the person being read insisted he wasn't, which turned out that John was actually right, once they thought about it. Classic stuff like you see on TV, such as when John was insisting on an uncommon name which could not be applied to everyone, and he was right (the child of a friend who was actually sitting just near the person being read). Then again, this name could have been overheard by the crew circulating and also transmitted to John.

There was information about accidents, babies and children that was very specific, which I felt could not have been gathered from information provided. Information about things people have done in the past, which could only be part of that person's history, and could not have been assumed to be something everyone did.

John Edward does provide specific information that does not appear to be based on information given by the reader. However, I would need to see more proof before I can say that what he does is legitimate. I would assume I could never be really sure unless I was to be read myself - and then I would end up being one of those whack-jobs that just 'believes', opening myself up to ridicule by all of those who insist John Edward is just a clever fake.

I walked out of the show and asked my partner what he thought of the performance, and he said that it was just like you see on television - and he was right, it was. I found the show very interesting. I went in there sceptical, prepared to acknowledge any part of the reading that could have been cleverly deduced from information given by the reader - and came out not much the wiser.

At this stage, I have a stronger belief in what John does now that I have seen a live performance. I still retain a certain amount of (what I think to be) healthy scepticism, and am not prepared to believe every word of a reading 'just because'. If John Edward is a fake, then he does it well - I personally don't think there is enough information 'given away' on which to base an accurate reading.

Valid XHTML 1.0!

There are 2 users online

1,072,686 total unique visitors
2,073,040 total pageviews
177 visitors in the last 24 hours
176 total visitors today
339 pageviews today
This page has been visited 17,681 times

Most users online at once:
52 on 12/13/2009