Caution: The Grift is Real
After spending countless hours delving into this subreddit, as well as others and news sources, I’ve begun to notice a troubling trend among those promoting the UFO narrative. Many of the individuals profiting from this phenomenon—whether through book sales, paid speaking engagements, or other avenues—seem to be the ones claiming to have had extraordinary encounters. Yet they often hesitate to make firm commitments about their experiences, seemingly to maintain flexibility as the narrative evolves around them.
In contrast, I find individuals like Grusch to be more credible. He presented his findings to Congress, conducted a brief press tour to share his background, and then stepped back from the limelight. On the flip side, people like Elizando continuously churn out books and accept speaking fees, often embracing outlandish ideas primarily for clicks and views.
Similarly, Jake Barber has not accepted funding from the public. Even with 300k views on his YouTube channel, that’s not enough for a sustainable income. Like Grusch, he clearly delineates what he has witnessed and what remains unknown. Elizando, however, keeps his experiences intentionally vague, which raises red flags.
Ultimately, I believe that financial motives significantly impact the trustworthiness of those in this field. At this point, my skepticism automatically kicks in whenever someone begins to monetize these topics. Grusch seems to understand this as well, which is why he hasn’t been on a never-ending cycle of podcasts and interviews. Stay vigilant, everyone. Where there’s an opportunity to profit from people’s curiosity, some will undoubtedly take advantage.
You raise some valid points about the motivations behind those who engage in the UFO narrative, especially when financial gain is involved. It’s interesting how the patterns you’ve observed highlight a difference between individuals like Grusch, who seem to prioritize transparency and credibility, versus those who may sensationalize their experiences for profit.
The fact that trustworthy figures tend to avoid ongoing media engagement and monetization certainly does lend credibility to their claims. It suggests that their primary focus might be on providing information rather than capitalizing on the growing interest in UFOs.
Elizando’s approach of keeping details ambiguous does seem to cater more to entertainment and intrigue, which can dilute the seriousness of the conversation. Meanwhile, Barber’s clarity and reluctance to profit from his insights, despite having a decent following, aligns with a more credible stance.
Ultimately, it raises important questions about the ethics of profiting off a topic that many feel deserves genuine inquiry and transparency. Your call to “watch the grift” is a necessary reminder to critically evaluate the motives of those who publicly share their experiences in the UFO field. It’s essential to support voices that value truth over profit.