Handling Publicity

[Ed Hurst]

Our Lord is our publicity agent. His directions are to simply live our faith and build up our shalom, and He'll take care of the rest. That doesn't mean we can just ignore things that might happen in the realm of publicity. There will come a time when folks will start asking questions, and we may even draw a wider interest.

Don't be a sucker for secular publicity. That's easy for me to say because I really dislike the attention that comes from it. I don't mind my ideas getting attention, but I don't enjoy being treated like a celebrity. Just tell me "thanks" and we'll keep moving forward. I am more likely to shine proudly when you can demonstrate using my ideas than if you throw flowers at me.

Not everyone can be like that. For some, garnering attention for something like this is a temptation hard to ignore. Let's make one thing clear: With very few exceptions, the mainstream press will always be hostile to us, even if not overtly so. I have a quote, never mind where I got it:

Journalists interview you, then use your statements to smear you, then get you deplatformed on the basis of the smear. They do this on purpose. It is an intentional, malicious trap. They get paid for it.

Don't fall into the trap. Let them investigate and draw their own conclusions, but don't be a sucker for their solicitations. They are going to ask the wrong questions in the first place, so there can be no right answer. I've written a ton about this religion and others will write yet more in the coming years. They can read as much as they can stand and say what they think will make them money. These people are rooted in a hostile idolatry.

Let's refuse to participate.

[jaybreak]

Our Lord is our publicity agent. His directions are to simply live our faith and build up our shalom, and He'll take care of the rest. That doesn't mean we can just ignore things that might happen in the realm of publicity. There will come a time when folks will start asking questions, and we may even draw a wider interest.

Don't be a sucker for secular publicity. That's easy for me to say because I really dislike the attention that comes from it. I don't mind my ideas getting attention, but I don't enjoy being treated like a celebrity. Just tell me "thanks" and we'll keep moving forward. I am more likely to shine proudly when you can demonstrate using my ideas than if you throw flowers at me.

Not everyone can be like that. For some, garnering attention for something like this is a temptation hard to ignore. Let's make one thing clear: With very few exceptions, the mainstream press will always be hostile to us, even if not overtly so. I have a quote, never mind where I got it:

Journalists interview you, then use your statements to smear you, then get you deplatformed on the basis of the smear. They do this on purpose. It is an intentional, malicious trap. They get paid for it.

Don't fall into the trap. Let them investigate and draw their own conclusions, but don't be a sucker for their solicitations. They are going to ask the wrong questions in the first place, so there can be no right answer. I've written a ton about this religion and others will write yet more in the coming years. They can read as much as they can stand and say what they think will make them money. These people are rooted in a hostile idolatry.

Let's refuse to participate.

I am on board with this already, thankfully. I haven't had any approaches yet from anyone in the media, even from smaller outfits. If I did, some of you reading this would already have known, but I more or less wouldn't participate. The only way to win is to not play the game, though with God I make it a point to never rule anything out.

A little less than a decade ago I was a semi-pro journalist for a well-funded music website. We had no political agenda, and we were mostly free to interview/write about what we wanted, pending editor approval. I never took cheap shots or sensationalized anything beyond the facts, but there were a few times I got things wrong or mislead through implication. That's the nature of language, and it happens even with non-controversial subject matter.

[Ed Hurst]

It's not so far different when I helped write a local church history. I had no agenda, only a well-crafted story that folks would read. I got all kinds of stuff wrong because people kept giving me incomplete narratives. Eventually I gave up because they got all hot and bothered about a critical item that was not rumor, but was embarrassing to a handful of folks. There was also a false story everyone believed at one point, and their belief shaped a critical turning point in the church's decisions, and they didn't want that included. I told them anyone could write fairy tales.

[jaybreak]

It's not so far different when I helped write a local church history. I had no agenda, only a well-crafted story that folks would read. I got all kinds of stuff wrong because people kept giving me incomplete narratives. Eventually I gave up because they got all hot and bothered about a critical item that was not rumor, but was embarrassing to a handful of folks. There was also a false story everyone believed at one point, and their belief shaped a critical turning point in the church's decisions, and they didn't want that included. I told them anyone could write fairy tales.

Yeesh. That sounds like a situation. You could get most of it right, but get one or two things inaccurate and it all goes to pot. :/