Scientology Madness!

djjaycool said:
Did the reporter have an agenda maybe I could not read his mind.
Click to expand...
I think it was very obvious he had an agenda. First of all, that's Sweeney's style. Aside from that, his manner of approaching the Scientologists belied the agenda he had already set out. If you read his rebuttal on the BBC website to the YouTube posting of his tirade, it's even more obvious.

This is not to excuse the Scientologists, of course. Frightening cult of weirdos. But you have more credibility as a journalist in exposing them for what they are if you come at them with some semblance of objectivity instead of setting out to do a hatchet job.
 
i can't quite follow your stance on this john.

pure objectivity in this instance is basically a full scale debunking and destruction of everything scientology believes.

he went out to debunk it, prove his theory, expose their beliefs...........based on a relatively intelligent audience who'd watch that, i don't see what the problem is with that.
 
My stance is it's a hatchet job. It's tabloid journalism, and barely that. It was not a journalistic endeavour as much as a nearly-scripted faux expose.

Objectivity is showing both sides of the issue. Have a Scientologist explain their faith alongside having ex-Scientologist tell their side of the story

But you don't go to every Scientologist you meet and say "you're part of a brainwashing sinister cult" (even if they are... how are you supposed to get honest answers when you start by insulting people?). Put the tough questions to them, but give them a chance to tell their side of the story.

And you don't stage getting turned away, and you don't show up unannounced and demand meetings.

The BBC is supposed to be better than that.
 
madness

But you don't go to every Scientologist you meet and say "you're part of a brainwashing sinister cult" (even if they are... how are you supposed to get honest answers when you start by insulting people?). Put the tough questions to them, but give them a chance to tell their side of the story.

I think any critical thinker should look at a story and see both sides of it. He asked them to prove that they are not brain washing people. I had no sympathy for the scientologist. I hate supposed new story that are really a promotion for a cause with really soft questions. I have never seen Sweeny prior to this so I had nothing to go on but this interview. They did not win any friends with this show. It is like bible toters who say come to my church or you going to hell. I can't understand how you expect not to be critized for beliefs. If you look at things like people who thought man could have powered flight, they were ridculed. They were later proven correct in that man could fly. If you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen. IMO scientology is still off the reservation.
 
Morbyd said:
My stance is it's a hatchet job. It's tabloid journalism, and barely that. It was not a journalistic endeavour as much as a nearly-scripted faux expose.

Objectivity is showing both sides of the issue. Have a Scientologist explain their faith alongside having ex-Scientologist tell their side of the story

But you don't go to every Scientologist you meet and say "you're part of a brainwashing sinister cult" (even if they are... how are you supposed to get honest answers when you start by insulting people?). Put the tough questions to them, but give them a chance to tell their side of the story.

And you don't stage getting turned away, and you don't show up unannounced and demand meetings.

The BBC is supposed to be better than that.
Click to expand...

Well said. my problem is now i have watched panorama and the scientology version of events and i still dont know anything about scientologist beliefs.
 
They believe we're descended from aliens... and you have to pay for enlightenment... that's about all I've discerned :lol:

(I learned more about them from that South Park episode with Tom Cruise in the closet... funniest thing I have ever seen! :lol:)
 
Sorry, but the programme IMO wasn't a "hatchet job". In the celeb interviews, Sweeny even said that their answers countered the negative things he'd been hearing and that the interviews had to be removed because he said the statement...

There are some people that say it is a cult...

Then they removed the interviews. I'm sorry but to me, he's just addressing the issue, if it's not a cult why can't they answer???? Surely if any of them had a decent enough response surely they'd have ok'd to use it???? They don't even have a response on the scientology propaganda.... (and yes, I use the word propaganda purely because it comes at it from one side)

Even the spokesperson, Tommy Davies didn't have a response to it....

I bet if you were to ask any hindu, sikh, christian, buddhist, shintoist etc etc they would tell you all about their religon if asked, yet no-one from scientology can or will...

CULT CULT CULT CULT CULT CULT CULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I read that article on Monday. And it's disturbing.

I never said the Scientologists aren't a crazy cult of scary-ass people. They are!

But even in this article, you can see Sweeney went into his contacts with the Scientologists with his mind made up and an intention to expose the evil in a one-sided "documentary"

The Scientologists admitted to having a camera crew following Sweeney... this was apparently part of their deal for access! He makes it out like he was being spied on 24-7...
 
Hmmmm

I think that posting two guys on him 24/7 is a little more than making a deal for access...It was more CIA than BBC!

Can you imagine the BBC doing a piece on the Church of England and having blue rinsed elderly ladies following reporters in people carriers with blacked out glass?

The Scientologists would have been better served using a more approachable front man, one that was less aggressive, because it never did them any favours and did little to rid them of their 'cult' status.
Forgetting their weird religious beliefs, that is their right of choice, but they are clearly a ridiculously secretive money making cult.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top