In the paranormal podcast and debunking community, online arguments are nothing new. But when comment sections turn toxic, how much responsibility should fall on the person who made the content?

The paranormal community has always had its disagreements. Believers, investigators, sceptics and debunkers often have very different opinions, and that’s perfectly fine. Questioning evidence and challenging claims are part of a healthy discussion. But sometimes those discussions turn nasty, particularly in the comment sections of podcasts, YouTube videos and social media posts.

When this happens, you’ll often hear creators say, “I’m not responsible for what other people comment. Everyone has their own opinions.” And to a certain extent, they’re right. Nobody can control what another person thinks or chooses to write online.

But does that mean content creators have no responsibility at all?

The Tone Starts With the Creator

Something that often gets overlooked is how much the tone of a video or podcast can influence the people watching or listening.

Think about it. If a debunker makes a funny, light-hearted video about a piece of paranormal footage, there’s a good chance the comments will follow that same tone. People will make jokes, have a laugh and perhaps share their own thoughts about the evidence. Now imagine that same footage being discussed in an angry video. The creator is clearly frustrated, speaking aggressively and getting worked up about the people involved. It’s hardly surprising if the comments become more heated too.

Then there’s the content that relies heavily on insults, mocking people and making them look stupid. When a creator spends an entire video putting someone down, should they really be surprised when their audience starts doing the same? Of course, not everyone will react in the same way. Even the friendliest videos can attract horrible comments.

But the tone you set often influences the tone you get back.

And this isn’t just a paranormal community problem. You’ll see exactly the same thing in gaming, sports, politics and just about any other online community.

There’s a Difference Between Criticism and Personal Attacks

Debunking paranormal evidence is not toxic in itself.

There’s nothing wrong with pointing out that a supposed ghost might be dust, an insect or a camera effect. Equally, there’s nothing wrong with a paranormal investigator questioning a debunker’s explanation. That’s how conversations should work.

The problem starts when the focus shifts away from the evidence and onto attacking the person. You can disagree with someone’s footage without calling them stupid. You can question someone’s investigation without insulting their appearance, their intelligence or their character. And this works both ways. Paranormal investigators can be just as guilty of encouraging negativity towards debunkers and sceptics.

Nobody should be above criticism, but criticism doesn’t have to be cruel.

So Who Is Actually Responsible?

Ultimately, the person writing a nasty comment is responsible for what they say. That shouldn’t be forgotten. However, creators also have some responsibility for the community they encourage.

If a podcast host or debunker constantly mocks people, uses insulting language and then laughs along with abusive comments, they’re helping create an environment where that behaviour feels acceptable.

Likewise, if a creator encourages respectful disagreement, doesn’t join in with personal attacks and makes it clear that harassment isn’t welcome, that can influence the audience in a more positive direction. It doesn’t mean creators should have to police every single comment or take the blame for everything their followers do. But there’s a big difference between not being able to control your audience and having absolutely no influence over them.

Can Things Be Better?

The paranormal and debunking communities don’t need to agree on everything. In fact, they probably never will, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

A bit of humour, healthy debate and even the occasional heated disagreement are all part of discussing subjects people feel strongly about. But perhaps creators on both sides could think a little more about the atmosphere they’re creating.

Are they encouraging people to question the evidence, or simply encouraging them to dislike the person presenting it? Are they making jokes about a situation, or turning an individual into the joke? And when their comment sections become hostile, are they genuinely surprised, or does that hostility reflect the tone of their own content?

Final Thoughts

I don’t believe content creators should be held responsible for every comment left on their videos or podcasts. People have their own minds and should be accountable for their own words.

But I also don’t believe creators can completely distance themselves from the communities they build.

If you create content that’s funny and welcoming, you may encourage a funny and welcoming audience. If you create content built around anger and insults, you shouldn’t be surprised when some of that anger and those insults appear in your comments.

It won’t happen every time, but the influence is there. And whether you’re a paranormal investigator, a podcast host, a believer or a debunker, the same principle applies. You can’t control everything your audience says, but you can certainly influence the kind of conversation you start.

the question isn’t whether creators are responsible for every comment. It’s whether they’re willing to take responsibility for the tone they set.