Inexcusable error in The Age
The Age, a newspaper based in Victoria, Australia, failed to do its homework in a recent article about the HBO series Big Love. The article’s author, Peter Mattessi, describes the polygamist family depicted in the series as devout Mormons, despite the disclaimers that appeared before many episodes that the Mormon Church banned polygamy in 1890. The article’s description is false, as the characters in the show are specifically not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The article’s title, “Latter-day saints go marching in,” is equally erroneous.Mattessi clearly doesn’t know any such Latter-day Saints, as he reveals the “secret” he learned from the series: “Mormons can be good people too.” That may be true, but the characters in the show still aren’t Mormons. The article in The Age merely perpetuates tired stereotypes and promulgates misinformation.
The fault does not lie entirely with Mattessi or The Age. HBO has intentionally tried to portray the characters on Big Love as members of the Mormon Church because it makes the show more controversial and draws a bigger audience. The show recently stopped carrying the disclaimer that appeared before the episodes, despite requests from the LDS Church. The makers of the series have intentionally engaged in misinformation in order to sell their program. The article in The Age is a prime example of careless journalism and how fiction gets passed off as fact.
The editors of The Age may be contacted at feedback@theage.com.au.
I agree that much of the blame lies with HBO. As this blog post mentions, they are going out of their way to blur the lines between LDS and FLDS, which causes confusion for those uninformed reporters that which to comment on the show and the situation it depicts.
Left by Connor on 08/02/2007I read the article in the age and wrote some feedback to them. This was their response:
“Dear Mandi,
Thank you for contacting The Age. We have had some similar feedback from another reader, and I was able to obtain a response from the writer, Peter Mattessi. Hopefully it may answer some of your queries regarding the review:
Firstly, thanks for your email.
I am completely aware that the Mormons banned polygamy a long time ago. So is Big Love. The Henricksons live in fear that they will be found out and their lives will be ruined.
With regard to the use of the term “Mormon”. As I understand it, the Henricksons are part of a fundamentalist group known as the “United Effort Brotherhood”, similar to and inspired by other breakaway groups who consider themselves, despite what the church of LDS thinks, to be the legitimate successors of the original Latter Day Saints church. They still practice polygamy, in defiance of doctrine, yet they retain many aspects of Mormon practices and culture.
I suspect that the Henricksons would consider themselves to be “Mormons”, even if other Mormons wouldn’t. I think that is probably the key point here. My article was intended as a conversational piece. I like to adapt just a little of the perspectives of the characters I write about, and that is why the word “Mormon” appears a couple of times in reference to Bill and his family. As a writer, I am more concerned with Bill’s perspective than I am with AP’s. Though others may not consider Bill a Mormon, he probably does, albeit an unconventional one. Thus I used the word.
There are several Mormon commentators who have made comments about the show, arguing that while the Henricksons may not fit the generally accepted definition of a Mormon, the show “nails the Mormon rubric”. However, since Big Love has so far eschewed the word altogether, we may never know for sure where it stands on its use.
Thank you again for your interest,
Peter
Please note that I will be recording your comments in Reader Feedback.
Regards,
Amelia MacDonald
Reader Services
THE AGE”
Hm.
Left by Mandi on 08/05/2007Can we please give up the idea that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints owns the word “Mormon”? The on-again off-again connection between the Church and Mormon is annoying — we get a reminder that we are not to be called the Mormon Church (Joseph had no problem with this, but we do now, so, okay), but they the Church buys and promotes mormon.org. Do we understand yet that “Mormon” does not equate to “a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” and that it’s possible to be either of those two things without being the other? If not, can we please start working on it soon?
But now we’ve got folks arguing that members of other restorationist groups can’t use the term Mormon to describe themselves? This is just as silly as the mainstream Christians trying to claim that we aren’t Christian because we don’t follow their traditions and they own the word “Christian.” This shoe is exactly as dumb on either foot.
Big Love is about Mormons who aren’t MotCoJCoLdS. We don’t need to be all knee-jerk about this — it doesn’t seem to be drawing any real negative attention toward the Church and may be finally clarifying the “Mormon’s practice polygamy” thing so that people can see a difference between Pres. Hinckley and Warren Jeffs for the first time. It’s sad to see this response, and then see that the target of the claim that they “don’t get it” get it better than the accuser does, and that’s not even addressing the silliness of calling this “inexcusable.” What measure ye meet shall be measured unto you, Peter. It is required of you to forgive all men their trespasses. Perhaps it would be better to spend a little more time studying your scriptures and less pointing out the mote in the eye of some well intended and better-informed nonmember.
Left by Blain on 08/08/2007I disagree, and so, apparently, does the Church. It has recently taken steps to trademark the term “Mormon.” I don’t know if I agree with that move, but I do believe that the term “Mormon” should be used exclusively with reference to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. To do otherwise is inaccurate and misleading. As we’ve noted before, the Associated Press agrees with this standard use of the term.
The comparison to the term “Christian” is also imprecise. Whereas the term “Mormon” has distinct criteria (membership through baptism and confirmation in the LDS Church), the definition of “Christian” is more nebulous. Many Christian groups and scholars disagree on how the terminology should be used. I think it is not unreasonable to allow the Mormon Church to define what constitutes a Mormon.
As for the use of the term inexcusable, my criticisms are based solely on professional standards of accuracy. Not bothering to do simple research is indeed inexcusable in an industry such as journalism that purports to inform the masses. Were I to commit a similar lapse in my profession I could be subject to censure or discipline, and rightly so.
Left by Peter on 08/14/2007