http://www.bfro.net/barna_alper.asp

Ugh.

You can count on lots of reenactments, cheesy CGI and the always reliable talking head. Is Leonard Nimoy available for the narrator?

It also says:

What can you do to help? Please send an email to Barna-Alper Productions. Express your appreciation for their decision to produce a series about this research. Please also mention your level of interest in the topic, and the TV programs on the subject that you liked the most. Any elaboration in that regard will help guide the planning and strategy of this TV series, particularly at this early stage.

Please CC your message to Contact@BFRO.net. Barna-Alper's email address is info@bap.ca

And if you want to let Barna-Alper Productions know what you really think of their idea, you can do so also. I did.

Well, it's a 'nice idea'... but this line is a proverbial 2 edged sword:



Market share and and viewership will determine how far and how long it makes it. If it's produced well, and not based on a lot of crappy reports from the database, then maybe it'll survive. If they EVEN begin to use their classic "Class B" reports to validate the content... well, you can't take any of it seriously.

Hi

Looks like it might be a Comedy show, " TruTV " Has some funny stuff on there

Peace
Tim

Did the same last night myself.

Alan

So what did you guys say? Tell us. Nothing good, right?
Just wondering, does anyone have anything good to say? Anything at all?

Hi

Well no matter what kind of show it turns out to be, I am sure i'll watch it

Peace
Tim

No Jack. Not here.

I actually posted about this, about a year ago. I used to be a member of the forums there and was skeptical of many of the posts. My account was disabled without so much as a howdy-do. I'd spoken to one or more "members" via telephone and after being "banned" couldn't get anyone to respond to a message/email/post. Anyway, I'd love to say something positive, but I look at the BFRO now as a business endeavor, which isn't a bad thing per se, but they "seemed" to be an organization more in the pursuit of science when I first found them. Now, I think a television series sounds more like what I'd expect from them and their "business", not a scientific organization.

BTW, I went there to read posts recently and read what is a classic bear looking for grubs account, but of course everyone posted about how it HAD to be a bf.

Sounds like I wouldn't last very long on their forum.

Whatever you might personally think about the BFRO, if they want to take part in a TV show, that is entirely their choice - It doesn't reflect well on the rest of the community to be contacting the producers of the show with negative comments about the BFRO - that's just nasty and petty IMO.

Personally, I wish them luck - I have my reservations about it, but I truly hope it is a successful show. If it isn't, then the chances of a TV company getting into bed with any other more scientifically-based organisation become zero.

Time will tell.

Cool, more press. I don't care who, BFRO, TB, whomever...just find proof as I'm tired of being the crazy guy who thinks he saw something in the woods that in reality doesn't exist.

From what I can tell from the announcement, it looks as though the BFRO have a production company interested in a show, but the company does not have any distribution deal. It's a curious moment to be announcing it to the world, but I assume the email appeal at the end is the real reason for it. If they could somehow harness their following and get a couple thousand emails into the production company, it would demonstrate interest in the subject and help them sell it into the networks. IMO, both negative and positive emails would work just as well.

From my understanding of how all this works, the show will not actually go into production without a commitment from a network. Typically, when networks buy a show, they're also financing the production of it (the production company says, "I will make this for you if you buy it from me."). My company has worked with a different kind of production house in the past that actually buys time on networks (like OLN or even local channels) but typically, those shows are being paid for by advertisers working directly with the production company for embedded ad spots or exclusive sponsorship deals. I'm not talking about infomercials. I'm sure we all have Saturday morning hunting or fishing shows. It's that kind of thing. It puts the standard model on it's head, and the BFRO's vaguely worded announcement could describe that kind of a deal. However, these types of shows don't usually show up on top-tier channels and, AFAIK, never end up in primetime.

It'll be interesting to see where this goes.

The last time I had any dealings with a TV Production company, I asked for copies of some of their back-catalogue - it became obvious to me that the sort of film they wanted to produce was a show about why idiots spend their time and hard-earned money chasing bigfoot. At that point, I told them 'thanks but no thanks', and the project died.

Not all publicity is good publicity is good publicity - it is very easy to get talked into a wholly different sort of production to the one you expected

agreed, to the point that you might actually watch one episode and draw your conclusions on the actual product.

Why is it assumed that contacting the producers via email is with a negative comment about the BFRO. Perhaps some would like to give them some ideas to help make it a better show.

Given the poor investigation and vetting procedures demonstrated by the BFRO reports that I and many others have commented upon, not to mention the deceptive practices of its fearless leader - any publicity given to the BFRO is not a good thing.

Matt Moneymaker has proven time and again that his organization is neither scientific nor honest in its reporting of evidence or claims.

IMHO - some excellent opportunities for comprehensive investigations are lost because people report their encounters to the BFRO instead of other organizations or individuals.
Why do they report them to the BFRO? Because the BFRO has the highest profile on the internet and in the media.

To increase the profile of BFRO in any way is not in the best interests of serious researchers - IMHO.

that should be a very interesting new show about the bfro or sasquatch once in comes on tv. thanks bill

That is what frustrates me as well. I suppose that they are the most well known org regarding bf, they come up first with a google search. I would like to see how the TBRC would have handled some things that went the BFRO's way.

That being said, I'm a sucker for any BF tv shows or documentaries so if it comes about and I get the channel I will end up watching it.

If this is going to turn into another 'lets bash the BFRO' thread, it will be closed.

Paul - I am not "bashing" the BFRO. I am just stating my opinion as to why I think that the BFRO having a TV show is not in the best interests of BF research.

I have no problem if you disagree with the points I made in my post. However, by appearing to discount my post as mere "bashing" is unfair.

Do you think that the BFRO has excellent investigative practices and vetting procedures?
Do you think that MM is a fine example of a leader in this field and that he is scrupulously honest in the claims that he makes? Furthermore - do you think that he is a good choice to become - by default - the "face" of BF research?
Do you think that raising the profile of the BFRO so that it becomes fixed in the minds of the general public as the only organization that they turn to for information and investigations is a good thing?