A recap of the NY Times article on Hans Mattsson.

http://youtu.be/-1BdbKJbZZY

Over three times as many comments as views! I don't think that happens very much.

Thats probaby because of the mormon commentors. They never look into anything about their religion unless it is for a priesthood lesson

I just read about 100 posts that involved three or four guys arguing about Islam. Another 50 posts were about how hot the new host of the Young Turks is.

Not all Mormons.

Its not the internet destroying it; it's the lack of truth and wide array of BS. If it was true, nothing could touch it.

Can you say "viral"?

Fantastic recap. It is so obvious!

Hahaha! Love this! Thanks for posting.

Thanks for posting. Great to see how the rest of the world isn't buying the Mormon story for one freakin minute. It's just a patent absurdity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2013 09:38AM by derrida.

My hope is that with all the mormon advertising, more and more people with learn about the religion and post online criticism about crazy mormon beliefs.

Great video. Thanks for linking it.

The Mormon cult is getting exposed for the sickness it is. Good to see it examined.

The power of that NY Times article is priceless. Thanks for posting a link to this video.

I watched it last night. There were only 439 views.

This morning, 12-short hours later there are 39,822 views.

EDIT: 2-1/2 hours later there are 43,685 views.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2013 01:28PM by jiminycricket.

That's incredible!

Cenk is the man...

The GAs in SLC are gonna need another PR scam for this one.

This is great. I love it. spread the word...

Anything to bring the Church down.

This will help. So happy that a really high ranking person is going public like this.

However, how do you explain the really smart people like a friend of mine who chooses to stay in. She is liberal, a Democrat. Doesn't like Utah Mormons much.

Yet stays in.

So perplexing to me.

"I was cool with everything so far, but now you want to fuck the maid"
Emma/Cenk

priceless...

Yeah, his saying that was cathartic.

I think it is interesting how we are citing the internet as bringing down the Mormon church when clearly it is the NY Times article, and the exposure that publication brought, that is doing the majority of the damage right now.

Just sayin'

Is it your point that a hardcopy newspaper article is the source of the current PR problems for TSCC?


For the past 6 months, the circulation for the New York Times (Mon thru Fri editions):

Print: 731,395 (6.2 % decrease versus 2012)
Digital: 1.09 million (%41 increase versus 2012)
--------------------------------------

http://thenextweb.com/media/2013/04/30/the-new-york-times-picks-up-new-readers-online-as-circulation-of-weekday-print-copies-slips-by-6-2/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2013 05:43PM by 3X.

Good point. Not to mention the number of non-subscribers who can get their 10 free NYT articles every month online - or get linked in to the article from other sites.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2013 05:48PM by thingsithink.

My point has nothing to do with any specific hardcopy, but the organization itself. It isn't the fact that the NY Times published something both in hardcopy and an online edition that is harming Mormonism, it is the fact that it was the NY Times as an organization that did the publishing.

If the internet didn't exist, that information would have still be disseminated and be just as damaging.

I think you are undervaluing both the convenience factor and the virtually unlimited (and immediate) distribution and connectedness that the Web provides.

While I might trot down to the local store to buy a copy of the NYTimes for reasons of general interest, I'm not going to do that expressly to read a mormon-centric article.

So, I and many others got to see the online NYTimes article, as well as the online SLTrib demi-article, for free, and without ink-smudges on our fingers. And I/we will also be able to see discussion of both on many mormon-centric blogs.

Connectedness, Son, embrace it :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2013 06:05PM by 3X.

True, for sure it is more convenient.

Let's imagine a world though where the NY Times didn't publish anything online. I would have to go up to a newspaper stand somewhere to purchase it. Now, the internet still exists and I am a blogger who is posting the truth about the history of the morg and writing some pretty damning things. All someone has to do is to type in the address to my webspace and they can get instant access to tons of information about how dumb Mormonism is.

Now, in this crazy world, which has more potential to damage Mormonism, the NY Times article or my blog post? Clearly it is the NY Times article. The clout of a vetted organization posting sensitive information is what is hurting the morg in this instance, not the fact that it can also be distributed via the internet.

I'm not trying to say that the internet is worthless or does nothing in the fight against ridiculous beliefs, but it is not the strongest factor by far.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2013 06:31PM by snb.

"...which has more potential to damage Mormonism, the NY Times article or my blog post?"

The damage is cumulative: a major newspaper and an intelligent blog perspective both contribute - but there isn't just one blog, and there isn't just one newspaper, there are many (some better than others).

And to experience the whole ensemble, you need the Web - even the Library of Congress can't get you everything, and get it expeditiously.

.... and yet, it was the internet that conveyed the information that lead to the defection of LDS Inc's MORmON leader in Sweden,
as the root cause of the entire event.

This entire thing might be viewed as just the latest chapter in the unraveling of MORmONISM brought about by the internet.... as these events are being discussed via the internet.

But, but, no! somehow the real focus in this instance belongs on the New York Times .... as an organization, not as part of the internet, just to clarify that point.

The NYT article was on a story that happened because of the interwebz. Mattson left LDS Inc because of sites like this one.

Mattsson would have left whether he had sites like this one to read or not. Intelligent people have the ability read books and books about Mormonism have existed for a long time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2013 05:53PM by snb.

snb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mattsson would have left whether he had sites like
> this one to read or not. Intelligent people have
> the ability read books and books about Mormonism
> have existed for a long time.

That is true, however, like Guttenbergs bible, it is now easily accessible to the masses. Additionally, we have seen so much whitewashing of LDS history, that unbiased cross referencing is a real opener to many people.

We should not forget LDS Inc attempting to round up all family journals to change their history.

Also, there is a lot of the population, including nevermos that love the entertainment value watching a harmful and hurtful organization like LDS Inc pummeled in the press.

Well, it is entertaining for sure :)

"...books about Mormonism have existed for a long time."

Yes, but despite the best efforts of LDS promoters, the average library (outside of the Morridor) isn't going to have much in-depth coverage of mormon minutiae, doctrine, history, culture, etc - few patrons would be interested. Researchers would have to travel to a large metropolitan library, perhaps a university library, or maybe a nearby mormon (stake center?) library

Or, they can let their fingers do the walking ...
---------------------------------------------------------

That may be true, but you have to take into account where the researching Mormon is located. I live in a small town. In 1978 there were ZERO books about Mormonism in my library except the BOM. I wouldn't have been able to find anything to stop me from converting to TSCC. I would be willing to bet the same is still true in Small Town, USA.

The Internet is what gave me the information I needed to confirm the feelings I had that the church was a sham and a cult. Thank goodness!! And thank you RfM!!

Has he actually left the church by now? I thought he was still a member & still attending meetings. Has that changed?

I need to be sure when I bring it up with a TBM.