Interpreter Publishes Bokovoy Article 9 Years Later...Without His Permission

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Kish:

What DCP and his friends decide to do with their own journal published off campus and without the imprimatur of BYU does not invalidate the legitimacy of BYU as an institution of higher learning. That is a patently absurd claim.

Given the thread about the Prodigal Press and how BYU has shut down other print services throughout its history, I’d suggest that the Interpreter has the full blessing and endorsement of the institution and the Church itself.

- Doc

[Kishkumen]

I don't think it is at all safe to assume that BYU gives its full blessing to Interpreter, or that all of the Brethren do. The situation is much too complicated to blithely assume that this is true. I would wager that it is, in some sense, incorrect, particularly in regard to BYU.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Sorry, I mixed up the thread here with a Reddit thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comme ... ess_a_new/

The 7th east press ran for a while when I was at BYU. Involved students found themselves in front of the HCO, then called the Standards Office. Other than intimidation there wasn't much the standards office could to since they were not doing something that was actually a standards violation. BYU just can't handle snark and criticism. The paper was soon banned from campus. 7th East Press was all volunteer and standards office intimidation discouraged the volunteer contributors. This was before the internet so the paper had to at a bare minimum cover printing expenses. Once it was banned from campus circulation dropped, which resulted in the loss of advertisers, and in a few months it was broke.

It seems BYU has a well developed play book to squelch alternate student press.

Hopefully Prodigal Press does better. Since it's online it will be hard to ban it and harder to put a financial squeeze on it. Although BYU could eventually block the domain from being accessed by campus networks, and they probably will, that won't stop students using 5G or other ISPs.

The comments thread is worth a look with regard to BYU banning non-sanctioned press. The fact that BYU hasn't shut the Interpreter down is very telling.

- Doc

[Kishkumen]

I don't think it is very telling at all. Look, Interpreter is not a BYU student paper designed to critique BYU. It is not distributed on BYU campus in the form of physical pieces of paper. You see the difference there? If BYU were to suppress a blog run by one of its faculty members who supports and defends the LDS Church, its mother institution . . . Well, I think we need not go beyond that. It is a complete non-starter. Academic freedom does not/should not only exist to allow certain discussions and not others. I understand that in point of fact academic freedom ordinarily works to protect a certain range of secular, left-of-center opinion that is not too challenging to the American imperial status quo, but it would certainly be difficult to imagine BYU's idea of academic freedom squelching pro-LDS propaganda.

In any case, what DCP does on his own time within a certain range of propriety should be neither here nor there for anyone at his place of employment. I was infuriated when Cecilia Konchar Farr was fired essentially for speaking at a Pro-Choice rally. It would be inconsistent/hypocritical of me to call on BYU to censor Interpreter because I don't agree with its overall thrust.

[The Stig]

It's no secret that Mr. Ford is prone to hyperbole; he is an attorney, after all. The affiliation between Interpreter and BYU is a loose one and his mention of that relationship is something of a red herring, to be sure. That being said, his primary point is the important one and it strikes at the very heart of the behavior of these men; behavior that has literally gone on for decades. Namely, their actions and their words clearly follow an 'ends-justify-the-means' approach to defense of the church. Anyone who has been around this saga of theirs for any time knows that DCP, Midgley, Kiwi57 (RCM), John Gee, et al. regularly follow a path of openly denigrating their opponents individually and personally. No chink in the armor of an opponent will go unnoticed. No personal failing will go unheralded. No opportunity to emotionally trigger an opponent will go unpassed.

One might think that they were simply being lazy in posting old articles and this article was just one in a series. Surely that has been the substance of their defense on this. But, that's nothing but cover; plausible deniability, if you will. No, they knew David Bokovoy has undergone a dramatic change in his beliefs, both personally and professionally. They knew of his concerns regarding the past actions of Interpreter. If they have any professional sense, whatsoever, they also knew it is a professional courtesy to reach out to an author before republishing an article. If they had actually wanted to rebuild a bridge with David Bokovoy, they would have reached out to him beforehand, explained their desire to republish the article and at least sought out his feedback on this plan, if not his permission. But they did none of those things. There is no evidence anyone at the Interpreter ever gave a single thought to the ethics of their actions. And in that regard, Adam Ford's is a scathing, accurate, and timely rebuke of their actions.

[drumdude]

No, they knew David Bokovoy has undergone a dramatic change in his beliefs, both personally and professionally. They knew of his concerns regarding the past actions of Interpreter.

Daved6: "Well, not to get too involved with it. But he stated his disagreement. Sounds like there is an obligation there to reach out to him and see if there is anything that needs fixing."

Peterson: I'm trying to be really careful here. Perhaps, though, I need to say that reaching out to my former student and one-time friend David has not gone well or been an especially happy experience over the past several years. Something that I deeply, deeply regret and by which I'm very puzzled.

And that's where I'll leave it.

This is such a Mormon trope, the bizarre cultish way of treating someone who leaves the church. "I don't know where he went wrong, I have to be really careful here because [stuff I can't say related to his falling away but I'll hint at publicly here] and I'm just leaving it alone [even though we republished his article, something he immediately noticed]."

Complete lack of empathy or understanding on Peterson's part, which is of course not surprising.

[Kishkumen]

It's no secret that Mr. Ford is prone to hyperbole; he is an attorney, after all. The affiliation between Interpreter and BYU is a loose one and his mention of that relationship is something of a red herring, to be sure. That being said, his primary point is the important one and it strikes at the very heart of the behavior of these men; behavior that has literally gone on for decades. Namely, their actions and their words clearly follow an 'ends-justify-the-means' approach to defense of the church. Anyone who has been around this saga of theirs for any time knows that DCP, Midgley, Kiwi57 (RCM), John Gee, et al. regularly follow a path of openly denigrating their opponents individually and personally. No chink in the armor of an opponent will go unnoticed. No personal failing will go unheralded. No opportunity to emotionally trigger an opponent will go unpassed.

One might think that they were simply being lazy in posting old articles and this article was just one in a series. Surely that has been the substance of their defense on this. But, that's nothing but cover; plausible deniability, if you will. No, they knew David Bokovoy has undergone a dramatic change in his beliefs, both personally and professionally. They knew of his concerns regarding the past actions of Interpreter. If they have any professional sense, whatsoever, they also knew it is a professional courtesy to reach out to an author before republishing an article. If they had actually wanted to re-build a bridge with David Bokovoy, they would have reached out to him beforehand, explained their desire to republish the article and at least sought out his feedback on this plan, if not his permission. But they did none of those things. There is no evidence anyone at the Interpreter ever gave a single thought to the ethics of their actions. And in that regard, Adam Ford's is a scathing, accurate, and timely rebuke of their actions.

There is one thing that I am absolutely certain of: no attempt on our part, or on the part of Adam Ford, will do anything to instill a sense of shame regarding these events in those who are responsible for them. As you point out, we have been to this stake dance many times. The playlist hasn't changed in decades. It will never change. Nor will those responsible for the playlist apologize for their taste in music. I appreciate your efforts to share the fact that it did happen with the rest of us. If you had not, I would have done so myself. That said, I think people have a tendency to overreact to these things. We are understandably baffled, perplexed, and offended by this pattern of behavior, but I think it is fair to say that the LDS Church, finding itself short staffed for skilled defenders, takes what it can get, and for certain kinds of rough-and-tumble responses, they are satisfied that DCP and company fit the bill for an acceptable price.

I really don't like people running down BYU in general over this. This is why I was more or less satisfied with the outcome of the coup back in 2012. Sure, it would have been better if Hinckley had not welcomed FARMS on campus, but unfortunately he had. This led to BYU being too closely connected to Mopologetic activities. As a result, even though DCP and friends were ejected from their journal published on BYU campus, people still hold BYU responsible for something that a sizable minority (at least) of the students, faculty, and staff probably would never want to be associated with.

[Kishkumen]

This is such a Mormon trope, the bizarre cultish way of treating someone who leaves the church. "I don't know where he went wrong, I have to be really careful here because [stuff I can't say related to his falling away but I'll hint at publicly here] and I'm just leaving it alone [even though we republished his article, something he immediately noticed]."

Complete lack of empathy or understanding on Peterson's part, which is of course not surprising.

Isn't the conversion phenomenon mysterious? I don't know how well you remember David Bokovoy before his conversion out of Mormonism, but he was happy to mix it up with the online critics, me included. I always liked him, but I was a little miffed at him on occasion, especially when it came to his participation in the criticism of Grant Palmer. Then, gradually it seemed, his life changed. Some of it was prompted by big family events, and some of it was brought on by his independent streak and courage. I recall him saying things in front of Brian Hales that made me go pale. Not because I was shocked by them, but because I knew how Brian Hales would likely receive them.

I don't know what David's friendship with DCP was like, but I know they were friends for quite a while and that they remained friends after BYU froze David out from employment at BYU.

I marvel at the changes because, when you think about it, all such changes are in their own way remarkable. Sure, we have our own reactions based on our own opinions and approach. Those who have left the LDS Church think leaving is the right thing for most and only natural given the fact that it is not "true" (whatever that means). Those who remain in often can't understand why anyone would leave the truth and all of the blessings of the gospel. It is mysterious to them. Those outside the LDS Church can't understand in any fair or positive way why people remain in. They must be weak. They must be duped. They must be . . . . (fill in the blank with some other patronizing explanation).

Of course, LDS people will say their own insulting things about those who leave.

If this were not mysterious to us on some level, we would not continue to see this behavior.

[Philo Sofee]

Peterson: I'm trying to be really careful here. Perhaps, though, I need to say that reaching out to my former student and one-time friend David has not gone well or been an especially happy experience over the past several years. Something that I deeply, deeply regret and by which I'm very puzzled.

Because now Bokovoy doesn't think the same he is no longer a friend?! What a CULT think. It is a show that Mormonism really messes up people's psychology when if someone actually doesn't believe the same, or think the same, they are no longer considered a friend. The problem is Mormonism, not Bokovoy. This is immaturity on Peterson's part. That he takes this stance is just totally silly. "Oh you disagree with me? Therefore you are now no longer my friend!" Talk about just butt frickin stupid thinking and belief. I might actually say that on RFM's podcast friday.

[Kishkumen]

Because now Bokovoy doesn't think the same he is no longer a friend?! What a CULT think. It is a show that Mormonism really messes up people's psychology when if someone actually doesn't believe the same, or think the same, they are no longer considered a friend. The problem is Mormonism, not Bokovoy. This is immaturity on Peterson's part. That he takes this stance is just totally silly. "Oh you disagree with me? Therefore you are now no longer my friend!" Talk about just butt frickin stupid thinking and belief. I might actually say that on RFM's podcast friday.

It is a little more complicated than that, Philo. David essentially called off his friendship with DCP pretty publicly over the stuff that Gee was writing that DCP was advertising on SeN.