|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 13:55:49 GMT -5
I've finally seen the Youtube and the Extension. While there was some poetic licenses with imagery, because who is going to be allowed to film an actual meeting, the crux of the program was about cases not proceeding as they should have, under law, in the first instance. Ross was absolutely right in what he said. It was important to note that this wasn't about the church, but about coverups of CSA in the church. Facts are facts are facts, and those who covered them up, need to face the music. I understand that sometimes simple, but good intentioned men get blinkers on and feel that their first duty is to the church, but they cannot do that to the detriment of innocent and abused victims. "Render unto Caesar" means exactly that......the obligations to the law are sacrosanct. If the 60 Minutes program helps prevent some abuse, and gives courage to victims to come forward, then we all owe a big thank you to Ross, 60 Minutes and others, including the victims who allowed their souls to be bared on the program. What was the 'extension' you refer to here. I've seen the you tube 60 minutes but haven't seen an extension. Do you have a link? |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 14:02:11 GMT -5
fixit . And that agenda unfortunately undermined the focus on what the program was about - CSA within the 2x2 grp, though the victims were genuinely distraught about their treatment and lack of action and support from within the 2x2 grp. The other 60 minutes video i posted about CSA in another christian sect (pentecostal), featured advocates who, though not victims of abuse themselves, were directly concentrating on the child sex abuse more than on the culture of the church. The pentecostal pastor in that video was deeply moved and emotional when referring to the churches' failure to act. As previously mentioned, the Royal Commission identified that christian and other churches were consistently 'secretive' about the sexual abuse. The leaders tried to avoid scandal and save face and it is also clear that recognising and admitting that CSA occurs leads to compensation. Most churches worship the $$ and the secrecy and trying to ignore reports of CSA was also about protecting their wealth. Therefore the reference to the 2x2's secrecy was not a unique characteristic in the context of CSA. Anyone who is concerned with CSA in religious organisations would surely know of the Royal Commissions findings and recommendations and maintained an objective attitude to the 2x2's shocking disregard for those recommendations and the worker's legal obligations when informed of 2x2 child victims. I agree. I do wish the word 'cult' hadn't been used. It did take away from the seriousness and could actually make what they said,(that was very serious) not to be taken seriously. It could have been misconstrued as having an agenda. I totally believe that they told the truth about what happened, but when the word cult was used it can be used by the group to not be taken seriously. That would be very unfortunate. Already we have seen a few on here pointing out the inaccuracies and asking whether it needed to be taken seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 14:03:22 GMT -5
How did 60 Minutes become aware of the CSA issue in this part of the world? I wonder if 60 Minutes in the US would be interested to know similar and other issues exist in the US. Also, it was their mention of Kitto being the "head of the church" (paraphrasing) that made me wonder if they realize this is a world-wide group, of which Kitto is just a small cog in a larger wheel. Good question. Maybe someone in the States and Canada should get in touch with 60 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 14:05:38 GMT -5
Yes, there was considerable poetic licence and I expected better of 60 Minutes. Australian workers don't wave their bibles around like that when they're preaching. Also, using the cult word showed there was an agenda to discredit the church beyond the CSA concerns. They weren’t called a “cult” but said to have “cult-like” behaviors/actions. I see that as a big difference. Basically as it has been also said to call the two by twos a cult one could honestly call them a benign cult. Cult has always denoted a breaking off or new sect of religion. It’s only in the past recent years the word “cult” brings dirty, illegal, inhuman thoughts to people’s heads. But that doesn’t really always mean that. I think what the reporter mean and what Ross meant was the “tight” control over the church the workers have seemed to always hold over the members. This is true STR. At one point the word cult was applied to any new religious group under 100 years of being an organized religious group. At one point Christianity would have been a cult and every other religion out there, at some point. |
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 14:16:53 GMT -5
fixit . And that agenda unfortunately undermined the focus on what the program was about - CSA within the 2x2 grp, though the victims were genuinely distraught about their treatment and lack of action and support from within the 2x2 grp. The other 60 minutes video i posted about CSA in another christian sect (pentecostal), featured advocates who, though not victims of abuse themselves, were directly concentrating on the child sex abuse more than on the culture of the church. The pentecostal pastor in that video was deeply moved and emotional when referring to the churches' failure to act. As previously mentioned, the Royal Commission identified that christian and other churches were consistently 'secretive' about the sexual abuse. The leaders tried to avoid scandal and save face and it is also clear that recognising and admitting that CSA occurs leads to compensation. Most churches worship the $$ and the secrecy and trying to ignore reports of CSA was also about protecting their wealth. Therefore the reference to the 2x2's secrecy was not a unique characteristic in the context of CSA. Anyone who is concerned with CSA in religious organisations would surely know of the Royal Commissions findings and recommendations and maintained an objective attitude to the 2x2's shocking disregard for those recommendations and the worker's legal obligations when informed of 2x2 child victims. I agree. I do wish the word 'cult' hadn't been used. It did take away from the seriousness and could actually make what they said,(that was very serious) not to be taken seriously. It could have been misconstrued as having an agenda. I totally believe that they told the truth about what happened, but when the word cult was used it can be used by the group to not be taken seriously. That would be very unfortunate. Already we have seen a few on here pointing out the inaccuracies and asking whether it needed to be taken seriously. I disagree. The secrecy of the truth church as a whole, being very few people even know of their existence does enable them into all kinds of “secrets”. I think Ross more or less spoke to this issue. It encourages members to be holier then thou in Sunday’s, special mtgs and when the workers are around. But other times lead a very secret other life. I witnessed that as a child growing up in their midst. Thus even workers get to entertaining their own secret lives and it’s just become so prevalent due to the secrecy atmosphere of the group. When outsiders aren’t really bothering to be watching their lives, then it’s become easier and easier to get by with even doing things like criminal CSA. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 29, 2019 14:36:39 GMT -5
Here's the first paragraph under Cult in Wiki: In modern English, the term cult has come to usually refer to a social group defined by its unusual religious, spiritual, or philosophical beliefs, or its common interest in a particular personality, object or goal. This sense of the term is controversial and it has divergent definitions in both popular culture and academia and it also has been an ongoing source of contention among scholars across several fields of study. It is usually considered pejorative. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CultIt seems unprofessional of 60 Minutes to use a contentious and pejorative word that was unnecessary if their focus was on the movement's handling of CSA. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 15:52:28 GMT -5
I agree. I do wish the word 'cult' hadn't been used. It did take away from the seriousness and could actually make what they said,(that was very serious) not to be taken seriously. It could have been misconstrued as having an agenda. I totally believe that they told the truth about what happened, but when the word cult was used it can be used by the group to not be taken seriously. That would be very unfortunate. Already we have seen a few on here pointing out the inaccuracies and asking whether it needed to be taken seriously. I disagree. The secrecy of the truth church as a whole, being very few people even know of their existence does enable them into all kinds of “secrets”. I think Ross more or less spoke to this issue. It encourages members to be holier then thou in Sunday’s, special mtgs and when the workers are around. But other times lead a very secret other life. I witnessed that as a child growing up in their midst. Thus even workers get to entertaining their own secret lives and it’s just become so prevalent due to the secrecy atmosphere of the group. When outsiders aren’t really bothering to be watching their lives, then it’s become easier and easier to get by with even doing things like criminal CSA. Not sure what you disagree with. That they shouldn't have used the word cult? If that is what you disagree with, the reason I think it was unfortunate is that it makes it more sensational then serious. If the purpose of the documentary was to get things to change in the group it was an unfortunate word to include. If it was just an attempt to expose the group in a sensational way, then I suppose they met their goals. Don't get me wrong. I am totally glad that they did the documentary. It needed to be done. I just wish it had been a bit more professional and accurate. It's obvious that 60 minutes never took the time to see how the group really operates. Showing a church with arched windows and other things that one sees in a 'worldly church' but not the 2x2's group is an example of that. I do understand that it would have been next to impossible to film a Sunday Morning Meeting but a Gospel meeting likely could have been attended and a few pictures snapped so it was more relevant. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 16:01:21 GMT -5
Snow think the extension mentioned is the full interview with Ross Bowden that was posted on, The truth about the "Truth".
|
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 16:07:53 GMT -5
I disagree. The secrecy of the truth church as a whole, being very few people even know of their existence does enable them into all kinds of “secrets”. I think Ross more or less spoke to this issue. It encourages members to be holier then thou in Sunday’s, special mtgs and when the workers are around. But other times lead a very secret other life. I witnessed that as a child growing up in their midst. Thus even workers get to entertaining their own secret lives and it’s just become so prevalent due to the secrecy atmosphere of the group. When outsiders aren’t really bothering to be watching their lives, then it’s become easier and easier to get by with even doing things like criminal CSA. Not sure what you disagree with. That they shouldn't have used the word cult? If that is what you disagree with, the reason I think it was unfortunate is that it makes it more sensational then serious. If the purpose of the documentary was to get things to change in the group it was an unfortunate word to include. If it was just an attempt to expose the group in a sensational way, then I suppose they met their goals. Don't get me wrong. I am totally glad that they did the documentary. It needed to be done. I just wish it had been a bit more professional and accurate. It's obvious that 60 minutes never took the time to see how the group really operates. Showing a church with arched windows and other things that one sees in a 'worldly church' but not the 2x2's group is an example of that. I do understand that it would have been next to impossible to film a Sunday Morning Meeting but a Gospel meeting likely could have been attended and a few pictures snapped so it was more relevant. I think the issue was to show how “secrecy” groups often are discovered to be those who feel they’re better then the rest of the world and thus gives way to having people hidden within their group who are more apt to lead a double life! |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 16:14:49 GMT -5
Not sure what you disagree with. That they shouldn't have used the word cult? If that is what you disagree with, the reason I think it was unfortunate is that it makes it more sensational then serious. If the purpose of the documentary was to get things to change in the group it was an unfortunate word to include. If it was just an attempt to expose the group in a sensational way, then I suppose they met their goals. Don't get me wrong. I am totally glad that they did the documentary. It needed to be done. I just wish it had been a bit more professional and accurate. It's obvious that 60 minutes never took the time to see how the group really operates. Showing a church with arched windows and other things that one sees in a 'worldly church' but not the 2x2's group is an example of that. I do understand that it would have been next to impossible to film a Sunday Morning Meeting but a Gospel meeting likely could have been attended and a few pictures snapped so it was more relevant. I think the issue was to show how “secrecy” groups often are discovered to be those who feel they’re better then the rest of the world and thus gives way to having people hidden within their group who are more apt to lead a double life! And, I agree that needs to be exposed. The only thing I thought was an unfortunate choice of words was 'cult'. It takes away from the subject. Certainly the secrecy should be talked about, I agree. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 16:15:36 GMT -5
Snow think the extension mentioned is the full interview with Ross Bowden that was posted on, The truth about the "Truth". Okay, thanks Redback. I guess I saw it all then. |
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 16:39:53 GMT -5
I think the issue was to show how “secrecy” groups often are discovered to be those who feel they’re better then the rest of the world and thus gives way to having people hidden within their group who are more apt to lead a double life! And, I agree that needs to be exposed. The only thing I thought was an unfortunate choice of words was 'cult'. It takes away from the subject. Certainly the secrecy should be talked about, I agree. The reporter was the one who first said “cult like”. I noticed Ross tried to not answer that in kind right away. Which many people in the world finding out about the two by twos for the first time do tend to say they’re “cult like” or even go farther to say they’re a cult. The secrecy and tight controlled group just will impress people that way. It isn’t always meant negatively. |
|
|
|
Post by Ross.Bowden on Apr 29, 2019 17:35:58 GMT -5
And, I agree that needs to be exposed. The only thing I thought was an unfortunate choice of words was 'cult'. It takes away from the subject. Certainly the secrecy should be talked about, I agree. The reporter was the one who first said “cult like”. I noticed Ross tried to not answer that in kind right away. Which many people in the world finding out about the two by twos for the first time do tend to say they’re “cult like” or even go farther to say they’re a cult. The secrecy and tight controlled group just will impress people that way. It isn’t always meant negatively. You’re correct - I did not call the fellowship a cult. I used the terms “church” and “sect” and deliberately steered away from using the word “cult”. The program did not specifically call the group a cult but used the terms “a cult-like church” or “cult-like behaviour” which was used largely as I understand it to describe the response from senior workers to victims of child sexual abuse and perpetrators. For example, in the first case shown Lyndy England was treated woefully, there was a witness to the conversation and the senior worker involved asked his co-Worker at the time to support the perpetrator in court when he first appeared. This was cross-referenced in detail but not all details were aired as there is a limited program time. I did not see the final program before it went to air but I was very comfortable with how it was produced and the significant effort they went to prior to its release in checking and cross-referencing material. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 17:55:02 GMT -5
And, I agree that needs to be exposed. The only thing I thought was an unfortunate choice of words was 'cult'. It takes away from the subject. Certainly the secrecy should be talked about, I agree. The reporter was the one who first said “cult like”. I noticed Ross tried to not answer that in kind right away. Which many people in the world finding out about the two by twos for the first time do tend to say they’re “cult like” or even go farther to say they’re a cult. The secrecy and tight controlled group just will impress people that way. It isn’t always meant negatively. Yes, it was the interviewer. I am not finding fault with Ross btw. I am saying it was unfortunate that the group was alluded to possibly be a cult. It was an unfortunate wording imo. If we want the 2x2's to actually take this documentary seriously it is unhelpful to bring that word into it. It immediately puts them on the defensive and they will tend to protect because they definitely don't feel like their group is a cult and it does have negative connotations in our world now. If they 'turn off' and don't listen to it because they are on the defensive or feel that the reporting is inaccurate, we lose them and we won't see any change and change is what we want is it not? |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 18:01:00 GMT -5
The reporter was the one who first said “cult like”. I noticed Ross tried to not answer that in kind right away. Which many people in the world finding out about the two by twos for the first time do tend to say they’re “cult like” or even go farther to say they’re a cult. The secrecy and tight controlled group just will impress people that way. It isn’t always meant negatively. You’re correct - I did not call the fellowship a cult. I used the terms “church” and “sect” and deliberately steered away from using the word “cult”. The program did not specifically call the group a cult but used the terms “a cult-like church” or “cult-like behaviour” which was used largely as I understand it to describe the response from senior workers to victims of child sexual abuse and perpetrators. For example, in the first case shown Lyndy England was treated woefully, there was a witness to the conversation and the senior worker involved asked his co-Worker at the time to support the perpetrator in court when he first appeared. This was cross-referenced in detail but not all details were aired as there is a limited program time. I did not see the final program before it went to air but I was very comfortable with how it was produced and the significant effort they went to prior to its release in checking and cross-referencing material. Ross you did fine. I am so glad this was done. I just feel that when that word was brought into it by the interviewer, it was really unfortunate because as we all know here, some will throw out everything else said and just focus on what they feel is an inaccurate label of them. I hope that doesn't happen but we are already hearing some ask if there is any reason to take what they are saying seriously because of the inaccuracies. |
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Apr 29, 2019 19:33:18 GMT -5
Ross.Bowden . Then why did you have your laptop open on a page which mentions the term "cult"? This was obviously pre-meditated, possibly pre-arranged with the other ex-2x2's who are committed to a constant and public exposé of the 2x2w grp, and it came across as a click bait strategy. It also detracted from the salient issue and the suffering of the women. This may not have been obvious to viewers who are unaware of the 2x2's and the divisions between christians inside and outside the church. When being interviewed by media, they will pounce on the most sensationalist term and, in my experience (not related to religion), you only have to refer to a dramatic term Eg. 'cult' in casual conversation with the journalist prior to the interview and they will repeat that during the interview.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 19:39:06 GMT -5
The reporter was the one who first said “cult like”. I noticed Ross tried to not answer that in kind right away. Which many people in the world finding out about the two by twos for the first time do tend to say they’re “cult like” or even go farther to say they’re a cult. The secrecy and tight controlled group just will impress people that way. It isn’t always meant negatively. Yes, it was the interviewer. I am not finding fault with Ross btw. I am saying it was unfortunate that the group was alluded to possibly be a cult. It was an unfortunate wording imo. If we want the 2x2's to actually take this documentary seriously it is unhelpful to bring that word into it. It immediately puts them on the defensive and they will tend to protect because they definitely don't feel like their group is a cult and it does have negative connotations in our world now. If they 'turn off' and don't listen to it because they are on the defensive or feel that the reporting is inaccurate, we lose them and we won't see any change and change is what we want is it not? The reporter would not have been aware of the church’s distaste for being called a cult anything. She was trying to make the truth of the matter known. |
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 19:41:03 GMT -5
Ross.Bowden . Then why did you have your laptop open on a page which mentions the term "cult"? This was obviously pre-meditated, possibly pre-arranged with the other ex-2x2's who are committed to a constant and public exposé of the 2x2w grp, and it came across as a click bait strategy. It also detracted from the salient issue and the suffering of the women. This may not have been obvious to viewers who are unaware of the 2x2's and the divisions between christians inside and outside the church. When being interviewed by media, they will pounce on the most sensationalist term and, in my experience (not related to religion), you only have to refer to a dramatic term Eg. 'cult' in casual conversation with the journalist prior to the interview and they will repeat that during the interview. Where was this laptop? I never saw anything but Ross in his chair facing the reporter in her chair??? |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 29, 2019 19:55:49 GMT -5
Yes, it was the interviewer. I am not finding fault with Ross btw. I am saying it was unfortunate that the group was alluded to possibly be a cult. It was an unfortunate wording imo. If we want the 2x2's to actually take this documentary seriously it is unhelpful to bring that word into it. It immediately puts them on the defensive and they will tend to protect because they definitely don't feel like their group is a cult and it does have negative connotations in our world now. If they 'turn off' and don't listen to it because they are on the defensive or feel that the reporting is inaccurate, we lose them and we won't see any change and change is what we want is it not? The reporter would not have been aware of the church’s distaste for being called a cult anything. She was trying to make the truth of the matter known. So you're saying that if they had been interviewing someone about a Baptist church they would have used the word cult? No church likes to be called a cult STR. That's a known. It's also a given that when someone uses the word 'cult' there are negative connotations. I am saying it was unfortunate that this interviewer went down that road because it took away from the subject which was about CSA and the women that were abused. All churches have CSA in their midst I am sure. I'm pretty sure she would not have used the word cult if she was interviewing CSA survivors from the Catholic church. So why would she feel it was okay to inquire about it with the 2x2 church? What was the motive for that. CSA happens in organizations that are not considered cults. So why do you think she was 'just trying to make the truth of the matter known'. What is the truth of the matter? And even if the 2x2's are a cult what does that have to do with CSA in their group? My point is that we want to see changes in the way the Truth does things. We don't want to have them dismiss it because of inaccuracies or by them getting offended because they feel they have been labelled as a cult. We all know very well that people watching are going to take that very loaded word and remember it. It takes away from the rest of the program imo and that is unfortunate. I could be totally wrong, but I do feel it was an unfortunate use of a highly controversial word/label and it wasn't necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Apr 29, 2019 20:04:31 GMT -5
sharingtheriches . By mentioning this i am probably inadvertently helping fulfil the goal of the strategy Ross applied  It is featured in the full documentary STR.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 20:40:17 GMT -5
The reporter would not have been aware of the church’s distaste for being called a cult anything. She was trying to make the truth of the matter known. So you're saying that if they had been interviewing someone about a Baptist church they would have used the word cult? No church likes to be called a cult STR. That's a known. It's also a given that when someone uses the word 'cult' there are negative connotations. I am saying it was unfortunate that this interviewer went down that road because it took away from the subject which was about CSA and the women that were abused. All churches have CSA in their midst I am sure. I'm pretty sure she would not have used the word cult if she was interviewing CSA survivors from the Catholic church. So why would she feel it was okay to inquire about it with the 2x2 church? What was the motive for that. CSA happens in organizations that are not considered cults. So why do you think she was 'just trying to make the truth of the matter known'. What is the truth of the matter? And even if the 2x2's are a cult what does that have to do with CSA in their group? My point is that we want to see changes in the way the Truth does things. We don't want to have them dismiss it because of inaccuracies or by them getting offended because they feel they have been labelled as a cult. We all know very well that people watching are going to take that very loaded word and remember it. It takes away from the rest of the program imo and that is unfortunate. I could be totally wrong, but I do feel it was an unfortunate use of a highly controversial word/label and it wasn't necessary. The strict control of church by church leaders. Calling other nonmembers false believers if go to some other church. Secrecy of church overall. It doesn’t take much introduction to secrecy churches for people to call them “cult like”. She didn’t say they were cult but cult like. That’s what I keep trying to point out. |
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on Apr 29, 2019 20:40:45 GMT -5
Ross.Bowden . Then why did you have your laptop open on a page which mentions the term "cult"? This was obviously pre-meditated, possibly pre-arranged with the other ex-2x2's who are committed to a constant and public exposé of the 2x2w grp, and it came across as a click bait strategy. It also detracted from the salient issue and the suffering of the women. This may not have been obvious to viewers who are unaware of the 2x2's and the divisions between christians inside and outside the church. When being interviewed by media, they will pounce on the most sensationalist term and, in my experience (not related to religion), you only have to refer to a dramatic term Eg. 'cult' in casual conversation with the journalist prior to the interview and they will repeat that during the interview. I only saw the laptop opened on the Telling the Truth web page, and even in high res, it was a struggle to see the church being defined as a cult. Certainly not deliberate click-bait as alleged, in my opinion. Instead the context was about having heard things about the church, Ross began looking things up. If it encourages others to do the same, what harm is that? However I don't believe that would be the case, as it is easier to use Uncle Google, than zoom up the web site on what is only a few seconds exposure. |
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 20:41:35 GMT -5
sharingtheriches . By mentioning this i am probably inadvertently helping fulfil the goal of the strategy Ross applied It is featured in the full documentary STR. I saw the computer but couldn’t ascertain what was on it. |
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 20:46:25 GMT -5
sharingtheriches . By mentioning this i am probably inadvertently helping fulfil the goal of the strategy Ross applied It is featured in the full documentary STR. I got the impression that the couple second picture on Ross’ computer was the fact that there is data on the internet about the truth church not the fact of being a cult. Otherwords anyone that per chance hasn’t ever heard of the “truth” can find it on the internet this day and age. It has nothing to do with being a cult particularly but that facts and stories about the truth church are available. Sheesh, trying to find fault with something done to bring out the corruption instead of being supportive! And before you start a long spiel about churches all being conducive to corruption; stop and think, please! Number one the film was dealing with a secret church and it’s corruption. Not any other church who has probably faced similar problems Any place where groups of people gather in repeated forms, there is always going to be someone try their devious behaviors. Then if they get by with it and are hidden or protected by the powers that be in that said group, there will be more and more such happenstances. It doesn’t have to be a church group at all! IT IS the depravity that lurks in hardened hearts everywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 29, 2019 21:10:20 GMT -5
And before you start a long spiel about churches all being conducive to corruption; stop and think, please! Number one the film was dealing with a secret church and it’s corruption. What in your opinion makes a church "secret"? |
|
|
|
Post by Ross.Bowden on Apr 29, 2019 21:24:08 GMT -5
Ross.Bowden . Then why did you have your laptop open on a page which mentions the term "cult"? This was obviously pre-meditated, possibly pre-arranged with the other ex-2x2's who are committed to a constant and public exposé of the 2x2w grp, and it came across as a click bait strategy. It also detracted from the salient issue and the suffering of the women. This may not have been obvious to viewers who are unaware of the 2x2's and the divisions between christians inside and outside the church. When being interviewed by media, they will pounce on the most sensationalist term and, in my experience (not related to religion), you only have to refer to a dramatic term Eg. 'cult' in casual conversation with the journalist prior to the interview and they will repeat that during the interview. Where was this laptop? I never saw anything but Ross in his chair facing the reporter in her chair??? There is a shot of me looking at my laptop. In doing my prep for the filming, I was keen to highlight a range of publicly available reference material that had been produced on the church over the years. There was no planning or discussions with other ex-members about this at all - it just seemed a logical thing to do. This included material produced by both current and ex-members. As a result, I was filmed talking through the large green photo books (there are 2) which contain hundreds of photos of workers and friends (including the very early days) which was produced by a professing man in Melbourne. I was also filmed looking at TTT which in my view is the best online reference site on the church and contains the largest collection of historical documents. Various snippets of this filming appeared on the program including the TTT home page (which does not refer to the church as a cult). There was no specific request from 60M for this - we had a general discussion about historical documents and some general filming took place around these. As I said previously, when you film something and it takes hours you don't know ultimately what will be used but I am very comfortable how it came together. My filming took place in 2018 - those who know us well locally can pinpoint the time because it includes footage of our dogs, including our beautiful Golden Retriever who at age 14 passed away in the 2nd half of 2018. |
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 29, 2019 21:33:30 GMT -5
Where was this laptop? I never saw anything but Ross in his chair facing the reporter in her chair??? There is a shot of me looking at my laptop. In doing my prep for the filming, I was keen to highlight a range of publicly available reference material that had been produced on the church over the years. There was no planning or discussions with other ex-members about this at all - it just seemed a logical thing to do. This included material produced by both current and ex-members. As a result, I was filmed talking through the large green photo books (there are 2) which contain hundreds of photos of workers and friends (including the very early days) which was produced by a professing man in Melbourne. I was also filmed looking at TTT which in my view is the best online reference site on the church and contains the largest collection of historical documents. Various snippets of this filming appeared on the program including the TTT home page (which does not refer to the church as a cult). There was no specific request from 60M for this - we had a general discussion about historical documents and some general filming took place around these. As I said previously, when you film something and it takes hours you don't know ultimately what will be used but I am very comfortable how it came together. My filming took place in 2018 - those who know us well locally can pinpoint the time because it includes footage of our dogs, including our beautiful Golden Retriever who at age 14 passed away in the 2nd half of 2018. Thank you, Ross! I thought what I saw on the computer was TTT but couldn’t tell for sure. I didn’t see anything on it to say anything about “cult” and have no idea why one would assume that just because it tells about the truth church. I know usually what is finally released of such documentaries often have to cut a lot of the filmed parts out due to time constraints. And that choice isn’t usually left to the participants in the film but by the editor-in-chiefs. Rarely does even the reporters get to help chose the cuts, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on Apr 29, 2019 21:33:47 GMT -5
Thanks Ross - exactly as I thought.
|
|
