Mormon Media Studies symposium discusses PR challenges

Mormon Times ^ | 14 November 2010 6:18pm | Lane Williams

[T Minus Four]

If someone came to you and asked you how to run the LDS Church's public relations outreach, what would you advise those who make such powerful decisions to do?

Would you emphasize the good works that Latter-day Saints do while downplaying doctrinal difference to avoid misunderstanding and strife?

Or instead of leaving the doctrine to the missionaries, would you go on the offensive, pointing out anomalies in other faiths in a way that showed the strength of your religious position?

How would you use the Book of Mormon? Would you call them to repentance, as the Book of Mormon often seems to do?

Would you be defensive about your faith, holding back publicly and then responding to attacks only when they came?

Would you ignore mean-spirited public attacks on the church, forgive seven times seventy and move on?

For a church that claims a mandate to spread its gospel to the world, these questions are of no small import, and the answers likely differ depending on the circumstances.

These questions are part of the subtext of this week's terrific Mormon Media Studies symposium at BYU. The keynote speech by the University of Richmond's Terryl Givens and other presenters provided insight into this powerful issue.

An insight I gleaned from his presentation is that when Latter-day Saints provided effective rebuttals, say, to the argument that Joseph Smith is a fraud — and they do — they are arguing on the turf their opponents set out. You see this today in the argument about whether Mormons are Christian or not. It seems to be a debate that can need engagement, but it is a debate set on the terms by others who are not Mormon.

How do you engage in the public dialogue and set the agenda? One way is to focus on the things that make Mormonism distinctive as a way to create conversation that drives the discussion, keeping church opponents talking about what Latter-day Saints wish to be talking about —say the Book of Mormon or eternal marriage.

Beyond Givens' speech, what stood out in this conference is how the church has responded to its public relations challenges over the years and continues to do so today.

BYU scholar Ed Adams studied the public relations efforts of President Heber J. Grant in the years just following World War II. In the decades before Grant became president, the church faced extensive anti-Mormon press and politics. The most famous of these may be the series of anti-Mormon exposes in the muckraking magazines of the era, including Alfred Henry Louis' dark series called "The Viper on the Hearth" in Cosmopolitan magazine.

Adams argued that President Grant followed classic public relations principles in building the church — in an era when the professional practice of public relations was just emerging. For example, President Grant was willing to meet with writers and was witty and avuncular in his approach. A kind, warm caricature of a golf-playing prophet emerged that helped the church at the time.

The church also took advantage of many opportunities that emerged in the culture at the time — including many stories that had Utah ties and brought reporters to Utah.

Similarly, Susan Easton Black's work shows the history of Mormon newspapers that were, in part, efforts at public relations before there ever was a professional practice of it. Her new book of Erastus Snow's newspaper, "The St. Louis Luminary," is an example of the period.

In 1852, not long after the church began settling in Utah, it sent some of its most important leaders, including Snow, to major metropolitan areas to speak up in behalf of the church and to build up the Saints wherever they were. These apostles — John Taylor in New York, Orson Pratt in Washington D.C. and George Q. Cannon in San Francisco — became important advocates for their cause in some of the church's darkest hours. Snow's was just one effort at public relations and the press.

The writers at the symposium took different approaches to the question of how Mormons should tell their story, but all demonstrated the remarkable effort that continues today.

In the end, with another Mitt Romney campaign coming up and tickets going on sale for a new Broadway musical from the creators of South Park called "The Book of Mormon," the question of how Latter-day Saints should present their church to outsiders through public relations efforts will continue to fascinate

[ejonesie22]

“Continuing Revelation” can cut both ways...

LOL...

[lawsone]

I am always interested when people say that the Mormon’s they know are wonderful people, but oh! that church they belong to.

May I quote The Savior: Matt: 7:16-20 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorn, or figs of thistles? Even so ever good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth
good fruit is hewn down,and cast into the fire. herefore, by their fruits ye shall know them.
We are damned for many things, the Book Of Mormon leads the way. The Bible is the only source of the “Truth”
May I ask, where in the Bible is the “Trinity or the “Rapture”mentioned, where is there any indication that Baptism by sprinkling is the correct way, why do the books of the Apocrypha not disqualify Catholics from being Christians? Why is “The only begotten Son” so hard to comprehend? Was Christ just being dramatic when he fell to his knees before Lazarus tomb and uttered a prayer to his Father? I cannot understand anyone reading the New Testament and not believing in three distinctive members of The Godhead, etc;

[lawsone]

I will give as an answer to whether Joseph Smith is a fraud or not from The Book Of Mormon Testimony Of Joseph Smith that appeared in the original copy’s introdution AND REMAINS THERE TODAY.
Joseph, a TEENAGER said, “He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and said his name was Moroni; “that God had a work for me to do; AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES, OR THAT IT SHOULD BE BOTH GOOD AND EVIL SPOKEN OF AMONG ALL PEOPLE”. You have to know that the statement did not originate from, a teenager or adult but from some other source.
This statement is not the basis for my Testimony but it is clear to non-members, or should be.
THE STATEMENT IS CERTAINLY FACTUAL!!

[ejonesie22]

Using the “ye shall know them by their fruits” is an old argument used by off shoot sects and cults for centuries now. It is easy with a little discipline to create a “Christian” looking life style. There are also clean living Buddhist and even Muslims. Obviously Christ meant more in this lesson than these appearances.

As far as the confusion on “three persons” this is easily resolved by doing the opposite of what the LDS (and others) do, which is to section off and divide the Holy Scripture instead of taking it as a whole. It is clear that Polytheism IS NOT a part of the Judeo Christan system. Examples:

Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else — Deuteronomy 4:39.

Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. Isaiah 44:6

Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no savior. Isaiah 43:10-11.

So there is one God, as is made clear above.

Once that is understood, when one sees references to the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, your “distinctive” members of the Godhead, one sees that there is much more at play here than some once human now exalted guys forming a committee. A truly powerful uncreated God, not limited by his once human status and such can be anything he wants, things beyond our total comprehension.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John 1:14

Again very clear, there is no hidden “a” in John 1:1 one as the Mormons have argued, it says WAS GOD.

As for the rest of your post, there are points of procedure and such Christendom argues over but the core beliefs are shared, so much so it is easy, when pettiness and misguided attitudes are removed, for Christians of all walks to come together and share a single message of Christ's love and unending grace. This is something I enjoy in many groups I work with so I have first hand witness that this is so. Call it my “testimony” if you wish.

The factual and spiritual issues with the Book of Mormon stand on their own, only emphasized by the complete disconnect of LDS doctrine not only from Christianity but often the BOM itself, which is oddly “trinitarian” in nature...

[colorcountry]

When reading Matthew 7:16-20, it is important to read the context. I suggest reading at least 10 verses before and after.

In this instance, we are being warned of false Prophets and so it is entirely appropriate when speaking about the false prophets of Mormonism.

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

What were the “fruits” of the ‘prophet’ Joseph Smith. Bank fraud, polygamy, violations of freedom of the press. This false prophet started a cult that absolutely devalued Christ and his work through the atonement, and turned Him into a petty god, who died to allow one to work towards becoming another petty god in the great system of godheads.

Indeed! By their fruits you will recognize them!

[lawsone]

“Christians berate The Book of Mormon and insist they only trust the Bible.
Might I suggest that The Rapture,the Trinity, The Nicean Creed, Baptism by sprinkling, and the Catholic books of the Apocrypha, and many other practices of Christians are not Biblical. I wonder how many Christians ever really read the New Testament.
Most agree that Mormons are good people. The Savior said, an evil tree cannot produce good fruit.

[colorcountry]

I'm going to repeat this post to you since you keep repeating “by their fruits.”

When reading Matthew 7:16-20, it is important to read the context. I suggest reading at least 10 verses before and after.

In this instance, we are being warned of false Prophets and so it is entirely appropriate when speaking about the false prophets of Mormonism.

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

What were the “fruits” of the ‘prophet’ Joseph Smith. Bank fraud, polygamy, violations of freedom of the press. This false prophet started a cult that absolutely devalued Christ and his work through the atonement, and turned Him into a petty god, who died to allow one to work towards becoming another petty god in the great system of godheads.

Indeed! By their fruits you will recognize them!

[ejonesie22]

From teenager, no, unlikely, but from an adult certainly, and Smith was an adult when reporting his story, so the only proof we have that Smith the "teenager" said such a thing is his testimony of such written in the BOM when he was an adult.

So not exactly a strong as case as you would wish for the argument you are making.

“AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES, OR THAT IT SHOULD BE BOTH GOOD AND EVIL SPOKEN OF AMONG ALL PEOPLE”

As a statement it is not at all spectacular, he was making up a holy book using such phrasing, to generate a 50/50 shot type statement is not great stretch.

You are correct though, the statement itself is factual.

So is my saying “I am going to the grocery store at some point to buy food” also true, hardly proof of my “prophetic” abilities.

[lawsone]

As a convert of 55 years and a missionary several times, the words victimization, or persecution have never been a part of the missionary program. The History Of The Church does contain these records.

[greyfoxx39]

You have to know that the statement did not originate from, a teenager or adult but from some other source.

There is no reason to believe it was from a Godly source. The serpent made statements to Eve.

This statement is not the basis for my Testimony but it is clear to non-members, or should be. THE STATEMENT IS CERTAINLY FACTUAL!!

Glad to hear you aren't hanging your eternal soul on so slender a reed.

Are you going to base your testimony on all the other non-factual statements that were made by Smith?

Changing First Vision Accounts: Conclusion

The evidence available from early sources, including Joseph Smith and his family establish a number of important facts.

First, Joseph did not relate his story consistently, but changed key elements over the years. He changed:

• The date / his age — from 1823 (age 16), to 1821 (age 15), to 1820 (age 14)
   
• The reason or motive for seeking divine help — from no motive (a spirit appears with the news of gold plates), Bible reading and conviction of sins, a revival, a desire to know if God exists.
   
• Who appears to him — a spirit, an angel, two angels, Jesus, many angels, the Father and the Son.

Second, common elements from early accounts raise questions about what appears to be a gradual evolution of Joseph Smith’s first vision story. Did Joseph begin to include a “Christian experience” in the telling of his story because Bauder noticed it was lacking? The earliest accounts given to Chase and Harris do not include this. There is a noticeable shift in the context of finding the gold plates, from 17 year-old money-digger to 14 year-old spiritual seeker. Is this an attempt to put his story into a more socially acceptable context? It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that as time went on, Joseph omitted uncomfortable but true parts of his history and replaced them with fictitious elements in order to make his story more socially acceptable and spiritually compelling.

One thing is clear, the LDS Church does a great disservice to investigators of its claims by presenting Joseph Smith’s 1838 account of his first vision as the only version of these events. It appears deliberately misleading to offer this account (now canonized as part of LDS Scripture) as an unquestioningly accurate and honest portrayal of its historical origins.

http://www.irr.org/mit/first-vision/fvision-conclusion.html

— Joel B. Groat

[T Minus Four]

AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES, OR THAT IT SHOULD BE BOTH GOOD AND EVIL SPOKEN OF AMONG ALL PEOPLE”

The one and only prophecy of Joseph Smith's that turned out to be true.

Here are a few of his FALSE PROPHECIES.

[ejonesie22]

Try rereading my post. Get off the LDS programming first.

Once you do that the rest comes together rather nicely.

[T Minus Four]

AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES...

Rev Sung Yung Moon

AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES...

Mary, Queen of Scots

AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES...

Mohammed

AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES...

Barack Obama

AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES...

Jim Jones

AND THAT MY NAME SHOULD BE HAD FOR GOOD AND EVIL AMONG ALL NATIONS, KINDREDS AND TONGUES...

Zeus

[Osage Orange]

The Savior said, an evil tree cannot produce good fruit.

Would Billion $$ Shopping Malls, Million $$ Newspapers, Giant $$$ Cattle Ranches..and Million $$ Hawaiian Hotels...count as good fruit? I can list more.....

What about the love of money? Does that ring a bell with you?

How many people have joined the mormon church...and then exited, after really finding out what's going on there? Would they be considered "good fruit" or "bad fruit"?

[colorcountry]

As a sixth generation Mormon, I can assure you that the LDS history is replete with stories of persecution and abuse. It is not a stretch to imagine many if not most LDS Missionaries repeating what they have been taught in Primary, Young Men's, Sunday School and Priesthood Meeting.

Try google

[T Minus Four]

You are in it pretty deep, aren’t you? I’m sorry, I know how hard it must be to unravel it.

[T Minus Four]

By their fruits you will recognize them!

I know people who reject any notion of God and are completely secular. Yet they are kind, polite and generous. They fork out canned goods for the food bank and donate coats for kids, they throw change in the red buckets at Christmas, etc.

It's nice to be nice. But anybody can be nice. Too bad your actions don't get you into heaven.

[colorcountry]

Like I said, the verses aren’t even about nice people. They are instructions in determining true prophets from false ones. Mormon prophets are false. You can recognize them by their fallacious teachings which are their fruits.

[caww]

I do believe much of that was brought on by their own doing...they denied Christianity and whole host of other rediculous and contraversial statements...and actions. But to carry the “victim” mentality thru the centuries is foolish...LDS has moved far beyond those times..though they carry it on their shoulders like a dead body...which it is.

[T Minus Four]

Mormon prophets are false. You can recognize them by their fallacious teachings which are their fruits

I really don't get how anyone could be a Mormon and defend their false prophets. It's just a plain FACT that most of their prophecies are false. I can't imagine how they justify it to themselves