Posted on 02/28/2002 12:37:16 PM PST by Utah Girl
The 2002 Winter Olympic Games may not have been the "Molympics," as many had feared, but the state's other religions received barely a mention by the 10,000 visiting journalists and only in passing.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, on the other hand, got a boatload of free publicity.
In the days leading up to the Feb. 8 Opening Ceremony, LDS media officials received more than 2,000 phone calls as reporters from all over the world scrambled to produce at least one "Mormon" story. In the days that followed, the LDS Church was mentioned in about 100 stories a day in Germany alone, said Bruce Olsen, director of the LDS Public Affairs Department, in an interview last week.
That number declined somewhat after the Olympics' own dramas took center stage, but the church continued to be a focus of some media coverage throughout the 17-day event.
Nearly 1,300 reporters registered with the LDS Church's media resource center at the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in downtown Salt Lake City. Many even made it a sort of home away from home, using the church's computers to send their stories to foreign newspapers or television stations and its televisions to follow the Games.
The Mormon Tabernacle Choir was written up most often, including in three stories in The New York Times.
"The Mormon Tabernacle reminded me of so many other good places I have been, places where people share their faith, and try to find some way better than the hurly-burly of the world," wrote Times sports columnist George Vecsey. "In sporting terms, this was like going to Yankee Stadium and meeting solid citizens like Geter and Rivera and Williams in the clubhouse, knowing it is as awesome up close as it is from a distance. No disillusionment. No bad vibes."
And this from Electa Draper of the Denver Post: "Sting said he wanted to give each of his Olympic backup singers a hug, but he didn't follow through. Maybe it's because there are 360 members of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir."
(The Times also wrote about Orthodox Jewish Rabbi Benny Zippel and The Dallas Morning News about the Hari Krishnas of Spanish Fork.)
The second most popular topic was the church's genealogy program, Olsen said. Besides writing about the Family History Library, about 200 journalists asked the church "to do their genealogy for them."
Other newspapers looked into the church's welfare and humanitarian services and its all-female Temple Square missionaries.
Many looked at the church's decision not to proselytize in Salt Lake City during the Games and Mormons' need for acceptance and understanding. A few took up the question of polygamy, the LDS Church's opposition to gay rights and LDS humor.
"It's the surprise of the Mormon makeover now under way at the Olympics: that Mormons can laugh at themselves," wrote Joe Garofoli of the San Francisco Chronicle.
One bold writer, Hank Steuver of The Washington Post, went where most other reporters feared to tread: LDS underwear.
The LDS Church "may never again be so open and welcoming to such irreverent global scrutiny, and it's hard to think of anything else about the faith I'd rather know," Steuver wrote. "Never mind about the angel Moroni, the golden plates, the forbidden coffee and the spirit babies. Let's just move right to the good stuff. What is the garment?"
But Mormons can stop wincing. This was no expos?, just a light look at what Mormons believe are sacred reminders of their faith.
In the end, Steuver found much to admire about the LDS faithful. "Everyone looked nutty except the Mormons, who looked golden," he writes. "Underneath, the Molympics rang true and warm."
Whatever Olsen thought of Steuver's column, which appeared on Tuesday, he did estimate that 95 percent of the pieces about the church were accurate and positive.
"We feel the church has become better understood. We've put aside the stereotypes." Olsen said. "I can count on two hands the ones with gross inaccuracies."
But, true to form, LDS media officials could not resist the urge to "correct" those few mistakes. On its Web site at ldschurch.org, there is a list of articles from various publications with offending passages on the left and the correct information on the right.
Ummm!, it is....
How does the LDS interpret it?
Whaaaaaaaaaaa!!! I'm being left out! :)
There is no LDS interpetation for the Child of Light(tm).
It was a symbol created specificly for these olympics, and from that context, my personal view of it is that it was to represent the burning desire to grow and acheive that lives in all great athletes. I'm sure other members would have their own view of what it means.
I thought it was kinda "new age-y" too.
They published an article about the new "porn czar" and revealed that she was a virgin. That's lower than a tabloid.
I have to thank them though, for doing so much to strengthen my testimony.
That guy from the Washington Post that is so interested in checking out members underware is obviously having Bill Clinton withdrawls.
And that article in the WP was just strange. The author is gay and loathes himself (he said so in some online discussion he had with some subscribers.) I thought it was a pretty pathetic attempt at humor or satire. Actually what the article reminded me of was a 13 year old boy snickering about body parts or something. Very juvenile and wrong.
Feel better now?? ;~)
Thanks, I feel better now.
Factoid de jour: average number of posts before converstation goes off topic in a FR thread: 6.66
I'm still receiving FReepmails from one die-hard who continues to attempt to regale and horrify with still more of his new-found "terrible secrets" about the Church obtained from from his "contacts" who are ex-"Mormons," Church members, or "friends" of the Church who are not members thereof.
What we neglected to add was that many on this thread FRmailed that individual, pimped their religion, and then when the other side was presented, got their undies all in a twist and hit the abuse button. I guess this falls under the "dish it out but can't take it" heading.
From my experience, if someone leaves the church because they don't understand the gosple and didn't have a testemony, they don't invest their time and effort in pulling other people out, they go on with their lives and have no axe to grind.
On the other hand, people who leave because their pride is more important to them than the truth, and who did have a testemony that it was true, are driven to rail against the church and pull as many out with them as they can so they can point to the ones they pulled out in a vain attempt to justifiy to themselves what they did. They want validation for their deeds that deep down they know are wrong.
Of course there are exceptions to this....
"...Ah, I don't Knoooooooooooow!"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.