The article clearly states that the FDS "does not endorse (approve) any" information they do not create. Are there any current elders that see it this way?
I must admit that I read this paragraph numerous times to really get everything out of it. Interstingly at the Service meeting last night this part went over without any interest. Just another article for "bad" JW's to pay attention to, nothing any of us "good" JW's need to worry about.
The statement that the FDS does not endorse...etc. did not specify any specific websites or printed material. Thus could be interpreted to mean just that, ANY material. However the paragraph immediately preceeding that statement was speaking about "spiritual" information and material. Thus, in typical WT fashion, this was left to multiple interpretation. At the very least it made its point about looking outside the org on subjects of a spiritual nature, at most, it impressed upon some the idea that they should only read WT publications and visit www.watchtower.org
Interstingly the article did not mention TV.... why is that? I made the comment earlier in this thread that words NOT used are as important as words that are used. Obviously there are no television programs produced by the WTS. If television was included in this article it would have effectively removed the possibity of interpreting the article to mean that only WTS produced material is acceptable for all of the mentioned mediums. This would have also implied that JW's would not be allowed to watch TV at all.
Could it be that be that the WT wanted the article to be open to both "balanced" and "strict" interpretations?
Its history shows that this is exactly how the writing dept. does things. Leave things open to interpretation, get feedback on R&F reaction, then counsel/modify accordingly down the road as necessary.
