Educational Psychology—Limitations and Possibilities

Endorsing an Angel 405
her approach hasn’t been proven,’ said Kelly D. Browell, PhD, a psychology professor at Yale
University.” However, the article concludes on a note that appears to question why anyone would
be so trivial as to question Claude-Pierre: “When my children got better, I never wanted to see an
anorexic again,” Claude-Pierre was quoted as declaring. “Then I wanted to stop once I’d cured
the cases in front of me. I hoped the line-up would stop. It didn’t.” The numbers of care-workers
and patients change from story to story, even when the number is provided for the same period.
An American psychologist, whom I interviewed, Dr. D (pseudonym) spoke of how she had
cried while watching 20/20. She had treated patients with eating disorders for over twenty years
and written numerous books and journal articles about treatment approaches. Watching 20/20,
she thought that finally help was available for those who did not seem to receive what they needed
from traditional care. Dr. D met Claude-Pierre at an academic conference. Dr. D was immediately
struck by the dissonance between the visual power of 20/20’s presentation of Claude-Pierre versus
what seemed to be more of a religious aura to the Montreux founder when she met her faceto-face.
Patients in the audience gave emotional testimonials and Claude-Pierre’s presentation
appeared to be more based on this incandescent quality rather than on delivering the kind of
low-key speech usually expected at an academic conference. Dr. D chided herself, however, for
being so cynical about a woman who appeared so selfless, a woman who 20/20 had stated had
achieved remarkable success and who was not doing her work for money but out of compassion.
Reportedly, it was the images from the 20/20 documentary that stuck with Dr. D until she
was confronted with the cognitive dissonance between this imagery and information that was
provided by a producer at NBC’s Dateline. That producer’s allegations against Claude-Pierre
convinced Dr. D that Claude-Pierre had lied about her credentials, treatment of patients, and a
number of other issues. Dr. D was distraught, she had seen Claude-Pierre as “her guru” brought
to her by 20/20, a program she was confident was a reputable newsmagazine and therefore “must
have done their research.” (Personal communication, December 1, 2000).
Despite the research examining the different paradigm under which journalists determine the
legitimacy of research, certain professionals I spoke with indicated that their early support for
Montreux was based on their being confident, as was Dr. D that “a reputable program like 20/20
would do their homework.” Goldberg maintains that 20/20 did “do their homework”: they saw
patients get better, they talked to Claude-Pierre, and they witnessed “miracles.”
HOW DID MEDIA DETERMINE THAT MONTREUX WAS REMARKABLE?
A theme of importance for professionals and academics is the difference in journalistic versus
academic evaluative discourse. McLellan, the reporter for the Vancouver Province, determined
that a doctor she spoke with who specialized in the treatment of people with eating disorders was
not critical of Montreux: “If he had said to me, ‘Oh my god, you know this person is totally insane
and is risking the futures of these kids,’ that would have been a whole different wake-up call.”
Inasmuch as this doctor did not say, “This woman’s insane,” McLellan reasoned that Montreux
was having success where others had failed.
McLellan is confident that her information is a responsible portrayal of what Claude-Pierre
was doing: “It is a feature on a woman that was doing something new.” For this study, thinking
it would be helpful to know more about how McLellan came to her knowledge, I asked if she
had read Claude-Pierre’s book or other books about eating disorders and documents concerning
Montreux. McLellan responded:
I never read it. If had to read a book on every subject I wrote about, I’d be insane. I did a huge four-page story
on genetically altered foods. I read two books to write that story. I don’t know, if you read it you’d probably
think I was positive about organic or something. [It] depends what’s going on in your own head. You try and