On Nov 3, 2007, at 5:30 PM, Merrill Oveson wrote:
<snip>
So what you're saying is "the means justify the ends." "We must
broadcast
all this filth, so that we can do all this good." Hence the term
"conflict
of interest," or should I say "conflict of morals."
This brings to mind the scripture "no man can serve to two
masters...."
Why didn't you answer my question? Give me some solutions. The
church needs to be able to produce the broadcast of conference, as
well as get it broadcast to as wide an audience as possible. What to
you suggest they do? Should we stop building temples and divert
money from that? Meeting houses? Stop giving wards budget money?
Exactly which part of the church's operation do you propose to take
money from if they divest themselves of their holdings in media?
BTW, since you seem to have an axe to grind with this, I should bring
up that Bonneville International actually owns a BUNCH of radio
stations as well, and I am sure that some of them play an
inappropriate song from time to time.
The LDS church has never endorsed NBC, or its shows, and they
certainly are not forcing you or anyone else to watch them. The
answer is not black and white here, and the good that the Church is
able to do by keeping these media holdings far outweighs any sort of
"conflict of interest" that you feel may exist. Note that even if
KSL was not the affiliate for NBC, another station would be, and then
KSL would lose the ad revenue and be forced to find other
programming. If they were unable to do so, they would lose their
right to broadcast on that spectrum. In the end, KSL would go down
in flames, and NBC would still be broadcasting the same TV shows. In
the end, the only one to lose in such a situation would be the LDS
church and its members.
Grant
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
