This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/reader-center/thomas-monson-obituary.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Our Obituaries Editor on Coverage of Former Mormon Leader Thomas Monson | Our Obituaries Editor on Coverage of Former Mormon Leader Thomas Monson |
| (7 months later) | |
| The Reader Center is one way we in the newsroom are trying to connect with you, by highlighting your perspectives and experiences and offering insight into how we work. | The Reader Center is one way we in the newsroom are trying to connect with you, by highlighting your perspectives and experiences and offering insight into how we work. |
| Readers reacted strongly to our obituary for Thomas S. Monson, who served as prophet and head of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for nearly a decade. In hundreds of messages to The New York Times and dozens of comments on the obituary, readers, including many Mormons, wrote that the obituary focused too narrowly on the politics and controversies of the Mormon Church and overlooked Mr. Monson’s contributions to the community. | Readers reacted strongly to our obituary for Thomas S. Monson, who served as prophet and head of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for nearly a decade. In hundreds of messages to The New York Times and dozens of comments on the obituary, readers, including many Mormons, wrote that the obituary focused too narrowly on the politics and controversies of the Mormon Church and overlooked Mr. Monson’s contributions to the community. |
| Here are some of their comments, which have been lightly edited for length and clarity. | Here are some of their comments, which have been lightly edited for length and clarity. |
| As a gay Mormon I can state that while President Monson’s policies were controversial to some, they do not reflect his life teachings, which focused on service and selfless love. That The Times only focused on the politics and not the teachings that defined him is disgusting. — Zachary, in a message to the Reader Center | |
| Hugo Chávez? Hugh Hefner? They had glamorous obituaries compared to this man, who dedicated his life to serving and helping others. — Jon Wilson, in a letter to the editor | |
| Decisions he made (not having women ordained to the priesthood or accepting gay marriage) were included without any fair explanation of his beliefs/Mormon beliefs regarding the subjects and without any context. I would accept it as normal that Mormon beliefs or church standards might be viewed as controversial and might be brought up in this obituary, but it was done without any taste. — Chantelle Wood, in an email to the newsroom | |
| We drew questions from readers’ feedback, and William McDonald, our obituaries editor, responded to them. | We drew questions from readers’ feedback, and William McDonald, our obituaries editor, responded to them. |
| Many readers have pointed out that much of the obituary focused largely on the Mormon Church’s controversial and politically divisive issues. They say Mr. Monson’s life included strong community and humanitarian work as the leader of a large religious following and wish the obit had reflected more of that. How do you respond to those readers? | Many readers have pointed out that much of the obituary focused largely on the Mormon Church’s controversial and politically divisive issues. They say Mr. Monson’s life included strong community and humanitarian work as the leader of a large religious following and wish the obit had reflected more of that. How do you respond to those readers? |
| I think the obituary was a faithful accounting of the more prominent issues that Mr. Monson encountered and dealt with publicly during his tenure. Some of these matters — the role of women in the church, the church’s policy toward homosexuality and same-sex marriage, and more — were widely publicized and discussed, and it’s our obligation as journalists, whether in an obituary or elsewhere, to fully air these issues from both sides. I think we did that, accurately portraying Mr. Monson’s positions as leader of the church, and those of the faithful and others who questioned church policies. | I think the obituary was a faithful accounting of the more prominent issues that Mr. Monson encountered and dealt with publicly during his tenure. Some of these matters — the role of women in the church, the church’s policy toward homosexuality and same-sex marriage, and more — were widely publicized and discussed, and it’s our obligation as journalists, whether in an obituary or elsewhere, to fully air these issues from both sides. I think we did that, accurately portraying Mr. Monson’s positions as leader of the church, and those of the faithful and others who questioned church policies. |
| I think we also gave due credit to Mr. Monson’s achievements: his openness to new work by scholars of the church, “allowing them,” as we said, “remarkable access to church records”; his expansion of the church’s global missionary force and his doubling the number of young women in the missionary ranks; and his embracing humanitarian causes, often in collaboration with Jewish, Muslim and other Christian groups. | I think we also gave due credit to Mr. Monson’s achievements: his openness to new work by scholars of the church, “allowing them,” as we said, “remarkable access to church records”; his expansion of the church’s global missionary force and his doubling the number of young women in the missionary ranks; and his embracing humanitarian causes, often in collaboration with Jewish, Muslim and other Christian groups. |
| But I also acknowledge that many of those who found the obituary wanting feel we did not provide a more rounded view of Mr. Monson — perhaps his more human side. I’ll concede that what we portrayed was the public man, not the private one, or the one known to his most ardent admirers. | But I also acknowledge that many of those who found the obituary wanting feel we did not provide a more rounded view of Mr. Monson — perhaps his more human side. I’ll concede that what we portrayed was the public man, not the private one, or the one known to his most ardent admirers. |
| In 20/20 hindsight, we might have paid more attention to the high regard with which he was held within the church. I think by his very position in the church, all that was implied. But perhaps we should have stated it more plainly. | In 20/20 hindsight, we might have paid more attention to the high regard with which he was held within the church. I think by his very position in the church, all that was implied. But perhaps we should have stated it more plainly. |
| Still, on balance, I think the obituary makes clear that he was a man of strong faith and convictions, who stood by them even in the face of detractors, while finding ways to move the church forward. | Still, on balance, I think the obituary makes clear that he was a man of strong faith and convictions, who stood by them even in the face of detractors, while finding ways to move the church forward. |
| In general, when publishing an obituary, how do you decide which points from a person’s life to highlight? | In general, when publishing an obituary, how do you decide which points from a person’s life to highlight? |
| The general rule of thumb is that if someone “made news” of some sort during his or her lifetime, then his or her death is probably newsworthy, too. So we have to look at the points that defined an individual in the public mind — whatever made that person known to the wider public: achieving a scientific breakthrough, attaining political power, winning an Oscar, hitting a home run to win a World Series. | The general rule of thumb is that if someone “made news” of some sort during his or her lifetime, then his or her death is probably newsworthy, too. So we have to look at the points that defined an individual in the public mind — whatever made that person known to the wider public: achieving a scientific breakthrough, attaining political power, winning an Oscar, hitting a home run to win a World Series. |
| I would also add that when dealing with people in positions of power — whether as the head of a country, a corporation or a church — controversy comes with the territory, and to a large extent controversy, points of friction of some sort, is what makes news. A quiet day in the West Wing is not news; a president’s clash with the Senate majority leader is. So an obituary — which in many respects retells the news of yesteryear — is going to recall controversies, as it should. | I would also add that when dealing with people in positions of power — whether as the head of a country, a corporation or a church — controversy comes with the territory, and to a large extent controversy, points of friction of some sort, is what makes news. A quiet day in the West Wing is not news; a president’s clash with the Senate majority leader is. So an obituary — which in many respects retells the news of yesteryear — is going to recall controversies, as it should. |
| We don’t stop there, of course; we also try to trace the arc of a life, from birth — in part to suggest what may have driven a person to succeed, to achieve, to find fame (or, in the case of the infamous, to upset the social order). | We don’t stop there, of course; we also try to trace the arc of a life, from birth — in part to suggest what may have driven a person to succeed, to achieve, to find fame (or, in the case of the infamous, to upset the social order). |
| And we try to give a flavor of the man or woman — something of the personality and personal impact. But we’re careful not to perform the role of eulogist, simply singing someone’s praises. We don’t write tributes. We strive for warts-and-all biography, in short form. | And we try to give a flavor of the man or woman — something of the personality and personal impact. But we’re careful not to perform the role of eulogist, simply singing someone’s praises. We don’t write tributes. We strive for warts-and-all biography, in short form. |
| Many Mormon readers did not think the obituary for Mr. Monson reflected the positive feelings that much of the Mormon community had for him. When writing an obit for a religious leader, is there an obligation to pay tribute in any way? | Many Mormon readers did not think the obituary for Mr. Monson reflected the positive feelings that much of the Mormon community had for him. When writing an obit for a religious leader, is there an obligation to pay tribute in any way? |
| We’re not in the business of paying tribute. We’re journalists first and foremost. I think in tracing the life of a religious leader, it would almost go without saying that he or she had won the respect and admiration of those who put them in positions to lead. But we may well quote someone explaining that respect or admiration, if it would offer something substantive to readers’ understanding of an individual. In other words, we’re not going to quote someone saying simply, “Mr. Smith was a wonderful person.” But we will quote someone saying why he was. | We’re not in the business of paying tribute. We’re journalists first and foremost. I think in tracing the life of a religious leader, it would almost go without saying that he or she had won the respect and admiration of those who put them in positions to lead. But we may well quote someone explaining that respect or admiration, if it would offer something substantive to readers’ understanding of an individual. In other words, we’re not going to quote someone saying simply, “Mr. Smith was a wonderful person.” But we will quote someone saying why he was. |
| In Mr. Monson’s obit, for example, we reached out to a scholar of the church, Richard Lyman Bushman, to shed light on President Monson’s move to lower the age under which women could be eligible for missionary work. We wrote: “It changed the whole view of what women would do: that they would go just like the men,” Professor Bushman said. “There was a great surge of readiness. It changed their mentality.” | In Mr. Monson’s obit, for example, we reached out to a scholar of the church, Richard Lyman Bushman, to shed light on President Monson’s move to lower the age under which women could be eligible for missionary work. We wrote: “It changed the whole view of what women would do: that they would go just like the men,” Professor Bushman said. “There was a great surge of readiness. It changed their mentality.” |
| The Times has a large, far-reaching and varied readership. When writing obituaries like this one, for a person whom our general audience may not be familiar with but who is well known to a particular group of people, how does the Obits desk think about our different audiences? | The Times has a large, far-reaching and varied readership. When writing obituaries like this one, for a person whom our general audience may not be familiar with but who is well known to a particular group of people, how does the Obits desk think about our different audiences? |
| We do think about particular audiences. We understand that those audiences will be the ones that scrutinize our work most closely. If we make a factual error in an obit about a physicist, say, we’ll probably hear about it from colleagues in the field (and then correct the error). | We do think about particular audiences. We understand that those audiences will be the ones that scrutinize our work most closely. If we make a factual error in an obit about a physicist, say, we’ll probably hear about it from colleagues in the field (and then correct the error). |
| We also understand that these audiences will be more sensitive than most to how we portray someone known to them. Some may have an agenda of some kind, wanting us to portray someone as they want that person to be remembered, perhaps in a light that best serves their interests. | We also understand that these audiences will be more sensitive than most to how we portray someone known to them. Some may have an agenda of some kind, wanting us to portray someone as they want that person to be remembered, perhaps in a light that best serves their interests. |
| We can’t bend to that, of course. We have to let the facts of the life paint the picture. In my experience, when we do that fairly and accurately, there are few complaints. | We can’t bend to that, of course. We have to let the facts of the life paint the picture. In my experience, when we do that fairly and accurately, there are few complaints. |
| With obituaries for important religious figures, do we ask people with deep knowledge of the religion to review the pieces before publication? Do you have a sense of how many active members of the Mormon community were interviewed for this obit? | With obituaries for important religious figures, do we ask people with deep knowledge of the religion to review the pieces before publication? Do you have a sense of how many active members of the Mormon community were interviewed for this obit? |
| When writing the Monson obituary, we reached out to church representatives and scholars of the church and the Times’s chief religion correspondent. | When writing the Monson obituary, we reached out to church representatives and scholars of the church and the Times’s chief religion correspondent. |
| Why do we refer to President Monson as “Mr.” in the obit rather than by his title in the Mormon Church, president? Some readers took offense to this. | Why do we refer to President Monson as “Mr.” in the obit rather than by his title in the Mormon Church, president? Some readers took offense to this. |
| No disrespect was intended. We might have referred to him as “President Monson” at least once, in keeping with our stylebook, but that book also says, “Mr. and Dr. are also appropriate.” | No disrespect was intended. We might have referred to him as “President Monson” at least once, in keeping with our stylebook, but that book also says, “Mr. and Dr. are also appropriate.” |
| In any case, “Mr.” is a common honorific in our pages for ministers (we’re obliged to say “Mr. Jones” on second reference, not “Reverend Jones”) and even presidents of the United States (you’ll find plenty of “Mr. Trump”s in our pages). | In any case, “Mr.” is a common honorific in our pages for ministers (we’re obliged to say “Mr. Jones” on second reference, not “Reverend Jones”) and even presidents of the United States (you’ll find plenty of “Mr. Trump”s in our pages). |
| Incidentally, I noticed that the Deseret News in Utah used “President” on each reference to Mr. Monson, but that The Salt Lake Tribune — like almost every other American publication — dispensed with any honorific altogether. To my ear, “Mr. Monson” sounds far more respectful than just “Monson.” | Incidentally, I noticed that the Deseret News in Utah used “President” on each reference to Mr. Monson, but that The Salt Lake Tribune — like almost every other American publication — dispensed with any honorific altogether. To my ear, “Mr. Monson” sounds far more respectful than just “Monson.” |
| We want to know your thoughts. Please join the discussion in the comments section. | We want to know your thoughts. Please join the discussion in the comments section. |