The effects of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation and the publication of the National Reading Panel (NRP) report profoundly affected how reading is taught in public schools as well as how program effectiveness is evaluated. The disequilibrium that resulted from state and federal mandates governing reading instruction set the stage for the incursion of scripted commercial program developers in the public school arena. One negative consequence of scripted programs is that the voices of teachers are silenced. As program developers and administrators demand fidelity when commercial programs are implemented, teachers are left with difficult decisions about how to meet the needs of their students when programs fail to live up to their promises. This paper examines the evidentiary sleight of hand techniques--misdirection, palming the evidence, and the shell game--practiced by program developers assuming dual roles of promoter and evaluator and the difficulties public school administrators face as they evaluate the effectiveness of commercial reading programs.