During the 19th century a new form of "journalism" (I use that term loosely) rose to popularity as printed materials and news papers, especially the penny press, become more prevalent. Without boring you on all the background of yellow journalism, the long and the short of yellow journalism is people would engineer details about news to make it more appealing to reader or to attract more readers. Over time, yellow journalism, noted Franklin Luther Mott, included entirely false stories, "scare headlines in huge print, often of minor news, lavish use of pictures, or imaginary drawings use of faked interviews, misleading headlines, pseudo-science, and a parade of false learning from so-called experts..."
Yellow journalism exists today in different degrees, but the reason I bring up this topic is for my assignment in class. Of all the groups targeted by yellow journalism, I would argue that one of the foremost (even to this day) was and is in fact the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Call it Anti-Mormon literature or yellow journalism; the techniques are basically the same. Other groups (politicians, organizations, etc) which were once subjected to the more sever varieties of yellow journalism, over the years, have been limited in scoop and usually to just political cartoons or some other obviously farce of the truth for entertainment purposes. The Mormon Church on the other hand, never really has lost their following of individuals and organizations that are willing to misrepresent the Church and its doctrine (obviously I’m not referring to entertainment type misrepresentation).
For more information on what defines an anti-Mormon or anti-Mormon literature, take a look at Jeff Lindsay’s website. For the purposes of this post, Anti-Mormons or Anti-Mormon literature is anyone that is openly antagonistic towards the LDS Church, using or not using misleading means to justify their open hatred for the Church. Someone who isn’t a Mormon, simply disagrees with the Church or its doctrine, or individuals whose purpose isn’t to defame the Church are not what I would consider anti-Mormon.
So what are some of these dishonest defamatory methods I spoke of? Here are just a few things from Lindsay’s page.
- Deceptive representation of facts
- False ideas or events passed-off as truths
- Conspiracy theories
- False impression(One of the most startling) “…Claiming to have advanced degrees in order to buttress their credibility.”
- Distorting LDS writings or doctrine
Continuing that idea, in the Teachings of President's of the Church, Joseph Smith pp. 324, Daniel Tyler's recalls a discussion between Joseph Smith and Isaac Behunin. Behunin said he would never turn antagonist if he left the church. Joseph replied,
"Before you joined this Church you stood on neutral ground. When the gospel was preached, good and evil were set before you. You could choose either or neither. There were two opposite masters inviting you to serve them. When you joined this Church you enlisted to serve God. When you did that you left neutral ground, and you never can get back on to it. Should you forsake the Master you enlisted to serve, it will be by the instigation of the evil one, and you will follow his dictation and be his servant."One more thought on anti-Mormon mindset before I mention an experience and talk about the dangers of online information. I served as a missionary for two years and ran into (sometimes most literally) people who either were proprietors of such malicious representations or perpetuators. Trying to understand the different motivations for such blatantly false claims regarding my faith, I came to understand another aspect of such motivations. One individual made the point that because they “believe” the LDS Church and its claims are false, they can justify using any means—honest or dishonest—to defame, discredit, and otherwise seek to “destroy” the Church. I was speechless at this attitude.
In keeping with the assignment of “dangers or the internet,” it’s obvious the danger that I’ll be talking about is ant-Mormon literature. It would be good to note these ideas could be applied to anything false on the internet. I’m reminded of the old adage I heard growing up as a child, “don’t believe everything you read.” Well it’s true.
In advertising we classify products into different categories based on the level of involvement of the consumer in the purchasing decision and the rationale or emotion the purchasing decision for that product. The high involvement very rational product category is cars, insurance, whether to go to grad school etc. Religion really falls into that category as well. Part of my personal buying process is researching online—these days, who wouldn’t? While it is frustrating researching a product only to find the research you’ve studied is false or doesn’t actually represent the product, even more frustrating is learning something you believe to be true and never know that it was actually false. How could I have benefited from that product if I only knew its actual benefits and features, not what I was mislead to know? Sometimes, you never find out about the error, other times it down the road and another purchase has already been made—it’s too late, all you can do is morn your loss.
I’m sure you can see what I’m getting at. Researching the LDS Church online can be a little hairy because of the abnormally large amount of misinformation and false notions about the Church. Some unsuspecting person would have a really difficult time sorting between the “yellow” details of anti-Mormons and actual factual information.
I’ve known many people who have fallen victim to the effects of anti-Mormon literature. There is a particular couple I think about, from St. Albert, Alberta. I think about them often. They were an elderly couple, semi-retired if I remember correctly, I was, with my companion, the missionary assigned to follow up with their inquiry to have some LDS Church media delivered. In LDS Missionary speak, the wife was GOLDEN. The husband wasn’t unrelenting; in fact I respected him, because we both think the same way—very analytical. Of course, like me, and any other reasonable person, the husband eventually went to the all-powerful internet to research this new Faith he and his wife were becoming very interested in.
Why is the Internet such a powerful tool for destroying individuals' testimonies? Or in this case, developing testimonies? The answer is, vast amounts of false information about the LDS Church on the internet and its assumed credibility. There is not accountability for individuals or organizations who intentionally mislead others online. Like yellow journalism in the 19th century, anti-Mormon content is presented in such a way to seem credible, to persuade an individual towards a certain agenda—usually to fear of the LDS Church.
I can still remember that last meeting with the family. I remember the expression of shock on his face at some of the claims of that anti-Mormon literature. I remember pleading in my heart to God to be able to say something that would help them understand what they were reading was false. I remember asking them to appeal to a Higher Power, not to take my word for it. I even moved my hair around to prove to him that I didn’t have any horns. But like so many, this man couldn’t believe that there would be such a vast quantity of untrue information about an organization. Who would do that? In this man’s mind, the quantity, scope, and consistency amongst the anti’s claims lent their lies some amount of credibility—it just doesn’t seem reasonable that so many “good God-fearing” Christian groups would lie to that level.
To be honest, I agree, it doesn’t seem reasonable that “good God-fearing” Christians would lie like that—at least, not any Christians that I know.
The connection to yellow literature is great - it also shows that some of the challenges people face online can be faced offline as well. Great post; probably your best so far.
ReplyDelete