Reader comments
'More Mormon' questioned

Richard - This is an excellent letter and I totally agree with your premise. I would like to challenge one of your points, however, regarding the polarized visions of Fox News and the New York Times. While the New York Times has acquired a reputation of liberalism over the years, the fact is that their editorial page includes columns from the likes of conservatives David Brooks and William Kristol. Many others from their editorial stable are moderate in their opinions and, yes, there are some liberal writers. I would submit that Fox News makes no attempt to provide any balance in their otherwise far right presentations. Thanks for your letter.

You're right.

I am an active LDS member, and I agree with the writer. I want to hear both sides of stories. I also been reading a lot Utah History lately because I have recently started teaching fourth grade. Utah has had many problems (Utah War etc...)because of the a "them and us" mentality. 150 years ago this month the Utah War ended and Camp Floyd was established. This was the beginning of bringing many different kinds of people into our state. I think it is a good thing. I raised my children near the U of U (where only about 1/3 of the people living there are active LDS). This was good for my children because they were exposed to many different kinds of people and they had to think about what they really believed. We do not live in a bubble. Yes, tell about LDS people (although I thought that's what the Church News was for), but remember that we are part of the bigger world.

The DNews is very "Mormon" in myriad ways, but the biggest blind spot is has is on the topic of over population. This newspaper is in total denial over the consequences of too many people on this wonderful planet. From air pollution, to fuel shortages, to declining quality of life, overpopulation is impacting our lives, in many ways, and the Deseret News, just won't go there.

Great letter to the editor Mr. Memory. I agree completely!

Mr Cannon or who ever calls the shots at the Deseret News. Until you stop seeing the Deseret News as a paper and you open your eyes and see the opportunity to make the Deseret News a portal you are doomed.

What a absurd idea,: making the DN more Mormon. We live in a new era with the Internet. In this world you can have it both ways. You can keep the general focus and link out to every aspect of Mormon culture at the same time.

Where you go in the new age is about where you link out to. It I were in charge, I would serve Mormon bashers too. In this new age the number of hits your news portal gets add up to revenue.

Fire you talent. Burn your corn corn at the same time. I wise man would be scouting for talents that will bring in young readers. Old Mormons are so all knowing.

Great letter but will go unheeded because of the mentality ruling Utah. They want shallow and ignorant people that way they can control and manipulate. I am/was LDS from outside of Utah and since living in Utah I want no part of this organization as I don't believe in Mormonism which is becoming stronger than the Gospel of Jesus Christ these days.

To lamonte - I'm just curious to know if you've ever watched the Fox News Channel? If so, you would know that a number of their regular reporters, including Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera, often report stories from a more liberal point of view. I'm not saying Fox News doesn't lean to the right, but to say they're exclusively to the right isn't true.

liberal larry - Let me give you the same advice I often hear when church leaders or other people complain about the high level of sex, violence and other filth in movies and on T.V. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Or in your case, if you don't like it, don't read.

Don't liberals believe in "choice"?

Couldn't agree more with Richard's comment. As an Australian 4th generation LDS who was born and lives overseas (like more than 50% of LDS do) I feel I could make a worthwhile contribution with submitted material which would be of interest to the total membership. My experience has been however that if the originator does not live in the USA the submission does not see the light of day.

Case in point. With 1/3 of Joseph Smiths direct descendants being Australians through his son Alexander and his grandaughter Inez ( who married an Aussie) I have gathered pictures and material showing some descendants were members of the "Light Horse" the unit that fought in the battle of Bethsheba in 1917 WW1, which was instrumental in removing the Ottoman empire from Jerusalem and heralding the return of the Jews. Importantly it fulfilled the prophecy and dedication of Palestine for the return of the Jews by Lorenzo Snow some 30 years previous. Very few ( if any) LDS members would know about Joseph Smiths descendants involvement. Are LDS members interested as such. I would think so. Will this ever get published in Deseret Morning News? Probably not. Foreigners!!

If you want the New York Times please purchase the New York Times. Those of us who are not jack mormon democrats or gentiles are tired of reading a paper that is critical of the mormons and all that we hold dear, remember the Church owns the paper! Journalistic integrity does not mean that you repeat the ranting of the New York Times. I look forward to reading a paper in which there is REPORTING not EDITORIALIZING of the news.

Lamonte's comments today point out something that seems to quash reasonable dialogue in this post and leasds to the persistent name calling on this board.
My appraisal of Lamonte's ongoing contributions to this forum are that he is neither liberal nor conservative, depending on the issue at hand. I believe that most serious posters are the same. On one issue we believe in we may lean to the left. On another, to the right. I think most issues are that way. Those who scream "neocon!" or "daily kos!" without really stating an opinion, do us all an injustice. For example, I know a number of people who are fiscal conservatives but are passionate about abortion issues, a seemingly liberal bastion. Loose on border control, but pro Bush re: Iraq. Most media outlets reflect their constituency. Depending on the issue, they are liberal or conservative, while leaning a general right or left. What makes a source worth reading or viewing is the occasional variance from our personal bent.
Read a bible once in a while even if you lean the other way. It will give balance. By the same token, if you don't believe in it, read the opposing side.

Why do you care which way a source leans. If you don't agree, at least you will learn something from it. If we are informed on differing sides of an issue, and we favor one over the other, we are biased. If we read only what we like and base are opinions thereon, we are prejudiced. Ther is plenty of each in all of us. If the DN wants to go more "Mormon" and that bothers you, read something else you like more, It's a free country with plenty of material on all sides of the issues. Personally I prefer bias to prejudice.

When the Ward Magazine Representative comes around each year to renew your subscriptions, the new form will be; Ensign, New Era, Friend, Deseret News.


Circulation problem solved.

Sure.
Have the paper be "More Mormon."
Then while you're at it, change the name to Pravda.

I deplore this move on the part of the DNews. It will simply serve to divide this community even more. DNews reporting will become untrustworthy unless a standard of complete objectivity is upheld. It is a terrible mistake, and I hope Mr. Cannon seriously re-thinks this approach.

Richard, Thank you for saying so well what many of us hope. This polarity in the media has me considering canceling my newspapers.

Any student of journalism knows the difficulty keeping bias out of a news story. Generally, the "bias" exhibited the news is created at the news editor or publisher level in determining what stories to feature. However, most journalists keep to the basics in thier reporting unless the organization that has a specific agenda.

The New York Times is considered to be the leading newspaper in the United States and, except for some newsworthy scandals, it remains the hallmark of journalism. There are many other newspapers which are both prestigious and meet the criteria of good reporting and good writing.

Many people may confuse the editorial page with the news section. The editorial page is the place for opinion, like this comments section provided by the Deseret News. Even here this is criticism of how the editors appear selective and arbitrary in their approval of comments.

The responsibility still remains on the reader to sort out the "truth" when the stories deal with controversial topics. It usually doesn't matter with a news article covering a fire. Whether a story is published or not published on some socio-political or religious subject and how it is written often shows bias, intentional or unintentional.

I agree with you Mr. Memory. The only thing I would add is that while the New York times (and most of the elite media) is very liberaly bias in almost all of it's reporting, Fox news tells you if their reporters are liberal or conservative, so at least you know what you are getting.

Conservative media outlets lambasted the New York Times for front-page story reporting Sen. John McCain had what aides believed was a romantic relationship with a lobbyist in 1999.

Is the NYT succeeding where McCain has not by rallying the conservative base?Conservative talk radio hosts, who for weeks have railed against the maverick senator's candidacy arguing he isn't conservative enough, today choose to offer tepid support for the presumptive Republican nominee by dismissing the New York Times story.

There is nothing in it here that you can say is true," said conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh on his radio show Thursday afternoon of the story.

"It is beyond disgraceful," said Sean Hannity on his radio show Thursday afternoon. "There's not throughout this entire article, a shred of evidence to corroborate or back up what the lead of this entire story is."

Many conservative media outlets had McCain defenders on their shows. On Hannity's radio show, Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, who has endorsed McCain, said the Times "puked up a nine-year-old rumor and put it on the front page of the New York Times with no corroboration, no named sources."

Will this mean that quotes from LDS General Authorities will reacquire the technique of being vague about certain things, then unquestioned and unclarified? I have found this custom almost unbearable over the years. In a Sunday School class we couldn't even figure out what Elder Ezra Taft Benson was alluding to in a quote from general conference of 1964.