Scott Lloyd Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Some days ago, Elder Dallin H. Oaks drew some attention with a speech up at BYU Idaho in which he decried the backlash against the Church in the wake of the Prop 8 victory and drew a comparison to voter intimidation during the civil rights movement of the '60s.Now, Joel Campbell, the "Media Observer" who writes for the Mormon Times has quantified what was already quite clear: The Salt Lake Tribune substituted its own manufactured controversy for actual coverage of Elder Oaks's speech. Here are some highlights:It was to be expected. Elder Dallin H. Oaks reignited a debate about freedom of religion. Unfortunately, much of the landmark speech's message got derailed by journalist-created sideshows.... 137 words. The paltry number of words the Salt Lake Tribune either quoted directly or paraphrased from Elder Oaks speech in its article. That's about 3 percent of what Elder Oaks said. So explain why the Tribune can't be charged with taking his words out of context? I guess the Tribune refused to take seriously what Elder Oaks actually said. Did they assume their readers would get it from another source? At least online, readers got a link to the talk's transcript.285 words. The number of words the Tribune dedicated to orchestrating its so-called "backlash" by taking Elder Oaks' analogy with the civil rights movement out of context and then getting the predictable response. Please don't tell me all of those critical sources just lined up at the Tribune offices Tuesday as Elder Oaks delivered his talk. The Trib helped fan the flames of the "backlash."10 vulgarities. Monica Bielanko, an executive producer at Salt Lake City-based Fox 13 News, used no less of these on a personal blog, The Girl Who, as she described her animosity toward her former faith, including insults of LDS Church leaders and members. Apparently she was ticked off because she posted a tweet (a posting on Twitter) about the talk before a 3 p.m. embargo deadline set by the church. A church spokeswoman asked her to pull down the innocuous tweet. Not sure that was justification for what followed. Link to comment
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.