Anything new on Barbara Anderson's case?

by Gamaliel 40 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  hamptonite21

  LOL @ ERIC
• 

  Gamaliel

  Eric,

  Good point! I guess I deserved that. I didn't suppose anyone was going to tell me anything that might have a bearing on the outcome or preparation of the case by either side. But I'm sure Mulan wouldn't have needed a reminder on that count.

  At any rate, I am still anxious to hear if things are proceeding well, if there are any unexpected delays or if anyone knows about dates, ETA, etc. Then people with more credibility could know when to start inquiring in earnest.

  And Eric, if you are Barbara, Good Luck! I didn't mean to pry, and I hope everthing goes well. This seems like a case with a lot of merit.

  Gamaliel

  Edited by - Gamaliel on 23 December 2002 19:26:22
• 

  Eric

  Gamaliel,

  Try this RE:edit,

  Then earnest people could know when to start inquiring with more credibility.

  Eric
• 

  Gamaliel

  Mulan,

  Thanks. I expected that must be the reason we weren't hearing much. I do believe it's one of the most exciting cases going at the moment. I'm sure you'll let her know we're all wishing/praying for her victory, if she's not on lately to hear it for herself. As someone else said, even a legal victory for the Wt in this case is ultimately a loss for the Wt cause.

  A lot of hopes are riding on this case, and I hope she doesn't feel like it's too much pressure. She's already a winner as far as I'm concerned.

  Gamaliel
• 

  Roddy

  >>P.S. Take Roddy with you.<<

  What's your problem with me, Eric?
• 

  Room 215

  With due respect to Barbara, whom I've never met, and from all that can be perceived at my distance, gives every evidence being a person of high principle and integrity, I share Gamaliel's skepticism about the extent of her participation in the creative/writing process at Bethel. It simply runs counter toeverything I knew and saw first-hand whe I was there, and I had a front-row seat to the process, thanks to the nature of my job.

  I served there for four years in the mid-sixties; I worked at the home, and my job accorded me full access to the headquarters complex, 124, 107 and the ancillary buildings. Most of the writers were located on the ninth floor of the 124 building, adjacent to the original Bethel library, others on parts of the tenth floor,and there were no women. About the closest a woman got to the creative process was as an artist, and even there they were in the minority; Teresa Mann is the name that comes to come, but there may have been one or two others.

  One comment about Klein's remark about ``humility'' and what passes for editing at Bethel. I've made a good living at writing and reporting over the 35 years since I left Bethel, in the ``real world'.' I have in the process come to learn a lot about responsible journalism and sound writing principles. It's appalling how many of these are trampled or ignored by WT writers; as a group they seem totally ignorant of the basic imperative of responsible journalism: the attribution of quotes, contextual framing and bibliography.
• 

  Gamaliel

  Room 215,

  I agree. Not crediting the writers just played along with what the industry often calls "yellow journalism." (Which usually just applies to how badly they [mis]quote and pull things out of context, and then don't attribute the source for fear it will be checked.) They are actually getting better at quoting their sources, but it's mostly because they can so easily get bad press with a big mistake. Witnesses aren't ready for a "correction box" covering mistakes, misquotes and mis-attributions from the previous issue, like most major papers and news magazines use. The idea runs counter to the F&D portion of F&DS.

  The WTS' biggest fear is no longer that the average JW will think a book is being endorsed for outside reading just because it's quoted and they know someone in Writing at Bethel thought the book was acceptable reading material. Their big fear now is that there will be some public embarrassment about their journalistic methods because this can effect the reputation of all their work.

  For the sake of argument, consider the following to be hypothetical, just so I don't get in trouble. Gene Smalley, or another writer in the department, could sit for long lengths of time, unembarrassed, reading Reader's Digest, seriously looking for ideas to incorporate. But, in my opinion, they read these magazines like they read the Bible, not to get meaning from context, but only to find quotes that support pre-determined ideas they wish to promote. The level of creativity seemed to be measured by how far-fetched the connection might be between the quote and the belief they needed to support. What's worse, I never got the idea that most of the misquotes were intentional, it was just the myopic way that they read outside material.

  There are some serious misquotes and misapplications of quotes, but in some cases they were using secondary fundamentalist sources that were already misquoting the original sources. (Which is even more embarrassing, imo.) (The first evolution book was notorious for misquotes, but if you've ever argued at length with a fundamentalist, it helps explain a lot about myopic mindsets.)

  I don't mean to be skeptical of claims made by or about Barbara Anderson, I just know that it would have been nearly impossible in the late 70's and early 80's. Doesn't mean it didn't happen. And I don't know how fast attitudes changed after I left.

  Gamaliel
• 

  rocketman

  Well, if nothing else, this thread is providing a rather fascinating insight into the WTS writing and publication process, and their use/misuse of quotations......interesting.
• 

  Room 215

  Gamaliel,

  It's also amusing to me that although the Society portrays Christendom as spiritually bankrupt, how frequently WT writers have recourse to their wonderful collection of Bible commentaries and reference works in the Bethel and Gilead libraries

  Many of these volumes are extremely rare and valuable, and the relatively few JWs who learn of their existence and examine them, are impresed by the depth of their expositions. Yet most JWs naively believe that thier ``Faithful and Discreet Slave'' has a monopoly on propethic interpretation, exigesis or historical background. Yet, the few remaining contributors to the production of the ``Aid"' or ``Insight" book (virtually the same as the former but with illustrations) will either acknowledge, or know in their heart of hearts know that these works would have bene impossible to compile without recourse to the Bethel library's treasure trove of the accumulated wisdom of Christendom.

  Whatever I think of the editors and writers, I must say that the WT proof readers, at least some of whom are women (Barbara Grizzuti was one) deserve high marks for their work; errors of spelling or punctuation are very rare in their publications.
• 

  Joyzabel

  To all the "old men" on this thread.

  We are in the 21st century now and Bethel did make changes throughout the years. Barb was at Bethel from 1981 to 1991. So what didn't happen in the 60's, 70's or early 80's was not the case in the late 80's and 90's.

  Why not just sit back and watch how her case unfolds and see for yourself what documentation she has and where she got it from.

  j2bf of the "I hated being a housekeeper" class.