The TV series post mortem with its bizarre German presenter Professor Gunther von Hagens, who is also behind the Body Worlds exhibition of preserved human corpses, give a confronting window into the world of death and post mortem analysis. For many, opening up taboos such as this is fascinating ad indeed beautiful, for others it is unnecessary and ghoulish. On the positive side the show has undoubted given publicity to the forensic sciences and may indeed have influenced your decision to study Forensics! Does this outcome justify the means? Or am I just being unnecessarily prudish? A similar situation arose some years ago within archaeology with the long‐running show Time Team. The show, which requires the team to answer an archaeological question in the space of three days (why only 3 days?), has long been viewed in equal measure with grateful thanks (for those who welcome the publicity it gives to archaeology) and resentment (by those who question why such a rushed process should be allowed on such important sites that are seemingly under no imminent risk). What should professional bodies such as those representing forensic science do about such TV shows? Should they be welcomed or are they dangerous tools that could be misused by half‐baked theorists, particularly since they will be viewed by people who will in the future sit on juries. Is there a need to control what is shown as misrepresenting forensic science in shows such as CSI? Or should we just be thankful that so many people are interested in what we do?