5 ms·

> Who among us couldn't guess what the NYT's take is going to be in a mormon leader's obituary before they write it? Their obit for the previous president, Gor

• simple_phrases 7y ago
  There's a certain irony in the OP accusing journalists of starting with a premise and working backwards, when the OP did it themself.
  • jrobn 7y ago
    This is true of almost everything human created.
  • mc32 7y ago
    presumably actual journalists would train against unconscious bias... maybe you're saying we can't expect they be any better than your average person on the street.
    • Ntrails 7y ago
      I would argue that defending against Bias is the editors job, they are not there to catch typos!
  • Mirioron 7y ago
    I don't really see that here though. He's over-generalizing, but you can't claim that some (many?) journalists don't do exactly what he mentioned. People expect what journalists write to be trustworthy, but too often what they write is not. Think back on the Covington kids saga. They were dragged through the mud and many journalists participated in it. If they get something like that so wrong, despite there being video evidence of the event online, then how are people supposed to trust what they write? Obviously not all organizations are as guilty of it. When I read something by Reuters I'm fairly confident of what I'm reading, but it's much less so with many others.
• gremlinsinc 7y ago
  I think the contrast is that the church has been heaped in controversies since Monson became President. The CES letter came out and 'A Letter to my Wife', which both have historical (from the source LDS.org) sources that basically do a lot to disprove and change the entire understanding of how the church came to be, of what really happened in the days of Joseph and Brigham, and what they were really like.. As an ex-mormon, we were taught deeply all about Joseph, and that he was not a polygamist that started w/ Brigham, the CES Letters (to which the church responded by being (more) transparent and created the Church Essays which back up the CES letters but try to spin it as 'it was the times they lived in'. A big split in the church for example was when Joseph was hitting it in the barn w/ Fanny Alger a 14 year old (he was 38). Even in that time it was NOT okay to have relations w/ a 14 year old.. the average wedded age was 19 and the average age difference was something like 23:19 a 38 year old marrying a 14 year old was very rare, and when he's already married very improper. His wife Emma rightly so was very against the practice. The kicker is that the reason Joseph was 'martyred/received justice' was because he'd burned a privately owned newspaper that was about to blow open the polygamy story and destroy his reputation. He couldn't have that so he burnt it down, which led the hidden opposition to turn against him and bring down the state law upon him (rightly so imho). He basically got what was coming to him, he wasn't a Saint, he was a conman. Just as the church has been conning people by saying that tithes goes towards building temple's and humanitarian aid, but has really been going to investment funds and business building. Back to the topic at hand, the fact that the church has all these controversies since 2012'ish is probably a HUGE reason that the Times decided not to be Mormon friendly. The church is hemmoraging members (exmormon sub on reddit has > 100k members now). It's excommunicating the 'good ones' left and right like Sam Young who's only sin against the church was calling for reforms regarding children being left alone in Bishop's office where they ask them about their masturbation practices and fantasies and if they act on those fantasies. Having taken DCFS foster care classes and learning about 'grooming', the Bishop's office is the perfect place for grooming to take place, and the fact that numerous Bishop's and ex-bishops are in prison for child abuse cases simply proves that. It's all just a matter of the 'times we live in now'... don't blame journalism for the slant, blame the times. Just like the church blames every negative historical thing they did on 'the times in which they lived'. Like Brigham who claimed a black person's highest celestial glory would be to be a servant to 'the rest of us' in Heaven. I'm pretty sure in the bible when a prophet 'believes' something that's wrong, doesn't God correct him and MAKE him change the narrative? Isn't it his job to CHANGE the times and belief of the TIMES? Not continue to be prejudicial because it's convenient? If any of them were prophets then they'd be on the right side of history not the wrong side. Edit adding: Also the November doctrine (November/2015) was a huge thing at the time as well. Basically it stated if you're a member of a family with same-sex parents you couldn't be baptized till you were 18 and partake in the blessings of the faith, unless you basically disown your parents. Many have left the faith over this one change in doctrine. Sources: https://cesletter.org/ https://cesletter.org/ https://www.letterformywife.com/ https://www.letterformywife.com/ https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/essays?lang=eng https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topi... Sam Young has over 1000 stories of abuse of children by clergy in the church at: https://protectldschildren.org/read-the-stories-2/ https://protectldschildren.org/read-the-stories-2/