Are Publishers Adequately Prepared for Bad Publicity?

by compound complex 24 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  OnTheWayOut

  The DO said that the Witnesses should listen with humility ... no comments whatsoever were offered on how to deal with the public's inquiries.

  I will bet you had an example of a D.O. working without the script. I really don't think WTS wanted him to say "listen with humility."
  Either that or he actually said something more like "show humility and let the householder speak."

  WTS will NEVER EVER educate their members about their negative publicity. That would cause curiosity and internet searches. Instead, they let those whacko worldly people spout it out and the members just assume Satan causes such stuff to happen. They'll assume WTS cannot predict what Satan will come up with.
• 

  dissed

  JW's always win the arguements, at least they think so. They can not win these type of arguements.

  After reading the Murieta case and the responses on the blog articles. It became very evident, that the JW replies came across like they were defending the WTS, and they were looking bad, very bad.

  The best course for them would have been to just shut up, but many of them couldn't take it and had to have the last word. A clear sign in this case, a lack of humility.
• 

  jamiebowers

  ...the acknowledgement that, while in service, JWs are going to become apprised of bad publicity over WT legal issues by the householder.

  Is it possible that something else is going to hit the news?...maybe another settlement of another multi-victim, multi-million dollar sex abuse law suit?
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Is it possible that something else is going to hit the news?...maybe another settlement of another multi-victim, multi-million dollar sex abuse law suit?

  Hmmm, that is interesting to ponder... Impossible to say for sure, but that certainly is one possibility.
• 

  metatron

  Something significant has changed. Bad publicity is a constant feature of being a Witness. The stuff that happened in Rutherford's day would curl your hair. Generally, the Watchtower didn't comment on it and didn't care.

  So, what is different?

  Either A) You have some talkative fools on the GB (Herd? Loesch?) who get hyper about this stuff or B) Something big and ugly might erupt soon and they are getting prepared.

  I note that this sounds very different from simply passing it off as persecution. It sounds very odd in tone, very passive and weak.

  metatron
• 

  besty

  I had 3 or 4 conversations with the same JW lady at my door here in Cali. She was a clueful intelligent woman. On one visit I challenged her on the out of court settlements to child abuse victims. I wanted to know the church position on those settlements.

  Her 1st reaction - to deny it had happened. My response - its an Associated Press article.

  Her 2nd reaction - its Internet lies.

  I invited her to check it out and get back to me.

  To her credit she did come back, with another JW and a 5 year old girl, making any meaningful discussion on child abuse impossible. She acknowledged that what I said was true, bad apples in every bunch etc. I said in that case the bad apples were the WTS as the perps were already in prison, these settlements were a result of an impending trial where the defendants were going to be the WTS for institutionally protecting pedofiles and reappointing them in different congregations time and time again. I said I was disappointed that they had come to my door and yet I was more informed about their internal affairs than they were. It didn't seem right that her church was sending her out, her in all sincerity, unarmed with a basic response on a huge case that had taken place right here on our doorstep.

  She didn't come back after that, which was a shame as I was enjoying our discussions - 607 was in the mix as well.....

  So there you have it - some of the best publishers are totally unprepared.
• 

  cognac

  That would cause curiosity and internet searches.

  Even as a JW that's what I would have done. The curiosity would have gtten the better of me. Plus, if that DO could have public info, why wouldn't I be able to? I wonder how msny JWs went home and did the same thing...
• 

  The Almighty Homer

  Devoted and indoctrinated JWS are very sly when confronted on talking about the maligning misdeeds of

  the organization, applying spiritual warfare might be the cause, running away and not talking about such things is the easiest way to handle

  situations like that. The inter-net and the age of information is changing a lot of these types of corrupt religious organizations, information

  that once was kept in control and carefully hidden by the organization is now incapable of doing so.
• 

  frankiespeakin

  Sound like the DO might have made a Freudian slip by giving some good advice to get the JWs more receptive to considering information not favorable to the Borganization.:

  '' The DO said that the Witnesses should listen with humility ... no comments whatsoever were offered on how to deal with the public's inquiries."

  I doubt the Society inspired the above comment he may have been just covering his ass from any repercussion by saying:

  "Will the Society be forced to educate the publishers? Incidentally, the DO made frequent references in his presentations that this is from the "branch outline."
• 

  frankiespeakin

  Just another thought about this:

  '' The DO said that the Witnesses should listen with humility ... no comments whatsoever were offered on how to deal with the public's inquiries."

  Maybe he should have said it this way:

  "Listen with humility,, but not very closely or intently and while they are spilling out their rotten fruitage of the mouth keep saying over and over again in your head:"I've got the truth! this is the truth!, there is only one true religion there is only one true religion and this is the truth! this is the truth!" to counter any lasting bad effect of such propaganda from people not a part of God's Organization."