Our official website, jw.org, has been used in a wonderful way. The site is now available in over 600 languages, and publications can be read and downloaded in over 750 languages. How effective is the website as a means of conveying the truth to honesthearted people? Consider: A married couple became disillusioned with religion because of the hypocrisy they had observed. In their search for spiritual guidance, they discovered our website. They began regularly visiting the site to read articles from our publications and to watch videos. They even downloaded the booklet Examining the Scriptures Daily and began to read the daily text along with their two teenage children. In fact, that is what they were doing the morning that Jehovah’s Witnesses knocked on their door. The Witnesses learned that as a result of visiting the website, the family had made many changes. They had removed their tattoos and body piercings, discarded their religious images, discontinued celebrating worldly holidays, and stopped viewing inappropriate movies—all of this before the couple’s initial personal contact with the Witnesses! As of this writing, both parents and one of the children are publishers and the parents plan to be baptized soon.
This is standard Watchtower reasoning. They make a bold assertion and them back it up by one example or anecdote, which, I guess, they feel validates the assertion. For example, In the paragraph above they make a bold assertion: "Our official website, jw.org, has been used in a wonderful way". The only proof they provide is their anecdote about one family (probably uneducated third world family) who visited their website and made changes. What does that prove? One family out of millions?
How can they say "Our official website, jw.org, has been used in a wonderful way"? Such a statement is worthless without significant evidence; one simple anecdote is not enough.