Sally is a psychic. She communicates with your dead relatives, who are standing right next to you.
I watched a bit of two of her shows (ITV2 Wed 11pm) a few weeks back. She had a rather cynical TV presenter celeb on, and proceeded to tell him all sorts of details about his life, including that he was about to sign up for a big new tv deal, that he had a flat in Brighton and was thinking of buying another, etc.
How did she do it? Most of this information was not, I guess, Google-able.
The TV celeb was certainly amazed. So was comedienne Rhonna Cameron, who got a reading on a different episode. Rhonna was very sceptical, but ended up getting tearful as Sally scored hit after hit, even being able to say she had two dogs that had died, being able to name dead relatives, the dogs, all of whom were supposedly right there in the room, etc. etc.
I'd be very interested to get more information on Sally Morgan's techniques. I believe that psychics do pool info about clients, but these people were new to it, so that wouldn't explain it. Nor, it seems, was it all down to standard cold-reading. Nor, I'm guessing, was much of it down to the TV technique of editing out all the misses (the clients were far too impressed).
Possibly Sally is relying partly on hot reading, i.e. research: e.g. a microphone in the waiting room to overhear what clients are saying, or earlier Private-Investigation-type research. e.g. perhaps Sally's researchers phoned the celeb's agent to do a little fishing (we wanted to book your celeb and were wondering whether he is busy next week? Oh really, what's he doing?). Though, even then, there are obstacles, including that Sally only gets to know who she's reading a short while before (but is this really true?)
The wonderful Tony Youens has something on Sally here.
The one thing I'm disinclined to believe, of course, is that Sally is a genuine psychic (some of you may consider that a bit premature).
The really depressing thing is the programme is nothing more than a highly effective advert for Sally and psychics generally. I think this sort of TV brings shame on its makers, frankly.
Anyone with more info on Sally - do let me know.
Sally's website, with some videos, is here. I recommend Kim Marsh video (bit of standard cold reading in there, though: "Who's Joe?" No reply. "And it's a man". Blank looks. "So he may have been know as Jack." Kim and Mum get hysterical "Oh my God! ...That's unbelievable!" [also notice the so-quick-you-miss-it switch with names : "Joe" is short for "Joseph" and "Jack" for "John" - completely different names!])
Comments
part one:
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=zChQnsXOzAQ
part two:
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=umiHxduh24s
part three:
http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=6QkHcmZwR4A
The shows they're looking at are remarkably similar to Sally's.
It's just an elaborate hoax which pretends to 'prove' its extraordinary claims. I am sorry but I am still not convinced.
I think that Penn and Teller show should be shown in every school in the country.
One of the reasons I favour getting kids' critical faculties sharpened up is so that they don't easily become victims of the sort of thing Penn and Teller expose.
I'm a teacher who has tried and the only part out of all the episodes that has halfway *near* acceptable language is the one on ouija boards. It's one of the things that the TANK vodcast and the Australian 'Sleek Geeks' show tries to consider.
I've seen Jamy Ian Swiss, who works with P&T, be challenged about it at a dinner at TAM3 and his (understandable) response is 'we're not editing for language; you make your own show if it isn't what you want'.
http://www.melbourneskeptics.com.au/psychics-mediums/psychic-sally-morgan-accused-of-employing-a-sidekick/
Why is it that Sally Morgan refuses to be tested or engage with non-believers and moderates all comments/bans people from her fb page if they dare to question her? I wonder.