What’s an “accurate idea of what is reported” except for what the reporter chooses to include? The reporter has a lot of power in shaping how a story is understood by the public.

Call my arguments whatever you want but I think it’s fair that Dobner’s use of sources was one-sided. Many of these sources had significant behind the scenes baggage with the Church. She decided not disclose that baggage which would have given the reader a better idea of how to take their comments.

Despite being a little late to this story, you may be interested that the same reporter has done something similar with an article this weekend which is both a puff-piece on the gay-rights activiists as well as a hack job on the Church.

“Gay marriage fight, `kiss-ins’ smack Mormon image“

If the only thing to complain about is the selection of sources, then this is just pettiness. It almost sounds as if you’re afraid they *might* say something bad about the church, and you want to pre-empt anything bad being said about the church. The news media, ideally, doesn’t work that way.

This is much ado about nothing.

But Palmer’s “Insider’s View of Mormon Origins” isn’t exactly friendly.

Btw, what does “to the foes” mean? Are you saying that Palmer is a foe? Writing a pretty straightforward book with honest intentions and then begging not to be ex’d makes you foe?

Regardless of your characterization of what the Church would say, wouldn’t a responsible article at least try to go to the Church as a source?

The AP doesn’t need to “parrot” anyone, Church nor foe. Why then go overwhelmingly to the foes?

The Church does not try to control the media at all. The first AP stories ran as is in the Deseret News (click on the first link).

I’m fine with non-offical sources being used, even hostile sources. How about using _one_ official source?

The associated press does not need to parrot whatever goes up on the newsroom. Sadly, the church thinks it can control news media discourse and that is reinforced when the membership cries when non-official sources are used.

If I were approaching this from a cynical standpoint, I would suggest that the AP reporter could interview Firmage over a couple of beers and put the tab on her AP credit card, while an interview with a church spokesman wouldn’t get any more “adult” than pie at the Lion House. But that would be overly cynical of me.

He was nice to Pres. Monson. But the point wasn’t so much the content of the articles but her selection of sources.

As a church scholar Firmage is well-known for his criticism and he has been quite public about leaving the Church.

When he was my law professor, he took his direct descendancy from Brigham Young and Hugh B. Brown very seriously. He always reminded us of it when he let us know what he thought about the Church in class.

I don’t think the AP reporter would have gone to him merely as an author of “Zion in the Courts.”