Comments on: Open Thread Thursday: Does Celebrity Genealogy Mean Sloppy Research?

By: Caroline Pointer

Caroline Pointer — Fri, 25 May 2012 02:26:07 +0000

We need to have big mouths and we need to lead by example.

Every day.

~Caroline

By: Debbie

Debbie — Thu, 24 May 2012 15:54:00 +0000

I think that the thing WDYTYA accomplished was getting people to the dessert of genealogy. That moment when you are standing on the family homestead from generations before. That moment when you see the photo or read the full story and FEEL your ancestor. Those moments are difficult to convey and yet WDYTYA did a great job of that. And once they get a taste of the dessert, they’ll stay at the table and we can then teach them the food pyramid.

By: Heather K.

Heather K. — Thu, 24 May 2012 15:28:25 +0000

Have to comment as a genealogy librarian here. you are right on about the issue being not so much about celebrity lineages but how the work is done! During the first season of WDYTYA, I watched every episode because there would be a reference question about it the next day – not the celebrity, but the records that were researched. There was much more focus on records and collections than this last season. Once records stopped being explained, the genealogy of the celebrity appeared less credible.

During the second and more so in the third season we saw more of an increase in people asking about genealogy and how to get started. Many of them started with Ancestry.com but were confused by how to search and how to find records (many did not understand the census yet). So I think the show did a good job of getting people to Ancestry.com with the mindset that Ancestry had everything. It gave those with a genealogy interest a place to start and grow from. During the learning process many of them figured out the limitations of Ancestry on their own. That’s when we see many of them going to the public library.

I agree jumping up and down and yelling loudly that genealogy needs a BIG voice in the conversation with media! The big problem is getting the attention of the media and providing a clear and concise statement about what genealogy is and what genealogists do.

By: Valerie Craft

Valerie Craft — Thu, 24 May 2012 14:55:26 +0000

There’s a lot that can be said on this topic, but one aspect that stands out to me this this: I think that part of the problem isn’t in the research, but the editing. I don’t think that whoever is in charge of editing the episode down, deciding what clips make it into the final show, really understand that they should be proving the story that they present. This shows up in little things, like presenting a newspaper clipping and not giving the name of the newspaper, to simply saying “we found this fact, let’s move on” to dropping “plots” before concluding them (I’m looking at you Eddie Falco’s episode! Is the son dead or not? When/why did she become a nun? Etc..). I don’t think that the editors/producers (whoever – I don’t know who makes these decisions) realizes that there are so many people out there watching who want the details and will research a show on their own time to figure it out.

They are bound by time constraints and a desire for good ratings, which can create understandable limitations. Why don’t they do a supplementary website that provides much of the research to those that are interested. They can save time on the show and make more genealogists happy.