Saving a lost boy.

Kudos to the Deseret News for its excellent reporting on the weekend rescue of a boy lost in the mountains near Daggett Lake.

That it happened on a Sunday morning and the reporters got photos and excellent stories -- even an interview with the boy himself, shows determination and solid craft.

It also shows classic feature style form -- anyone can learn more about effective writing here.

Readers often generally only read one sentence before deciding whether to read an entire piece, so writers ought to hook them in that sentence.  Often, the best approach to a story like this is to find an irony or a dramatic moment.  (I likely would have picked the dramatic moment -- when the family knew the boy was lost -- when the men on horseback found the boy -- when the boy decided to start cutting up his jacket ... moments of decision that illustrate the central conflict of the story.) They chose irony -- how is it like the Hansel and Gretel story, a solid choice.

All effective hooks, and this has one, start with an implied question.  (Something like, what happened next or what happened after?  In this case, the implied question is?  How is it like Hansel and Gretl?)

THe article then answers that question, giving a rough overview of the story in what is called a nut paragraph or nut paragraphs.

The middle of these pieces follows these nut grafs, and this is a classic example, often merely tells the story in chronological order.

The ending leaves us with an emotion -- Philip Fradkin, a pulitzer winner, calls it a "twanger." 

This writing doesn't end with a restatement nor some kind of moral.  Instead, it is a little emotion -- the twang of a guitar string -- that captures the story somehow and leaves with a feeling of completeness.

This example doesn't return somehow to the beginning, but endings often do.

I plan to show this to my students as a classic example of writing.

Nice work.

Modern missionary work

The Religion News Service, republished here, has published a solid article about the church's online missionary efforts.  

About a year ago, I took a couple of hours and systematically looked at articles about Mormon missionaries in the American news media.

With only a couple of exceptions, they were extraordinarily positive.  What I noticed is that missionary stories needed to be more than just typical Mormon missionary, but the missionary with an unusual challenge or the missionary with the unusual story.

This fits this.  As always, letting our people speak -- when the news media allows it -- is the best P.R. the church has.

A must-read

Not surprisingly, The Wall Street Journal published the best personal account of the demonstrations in Iran.

It looks as though we have, more or less, another Tiananmen Square.

Nevertheless, something is in the air there and it is inspiring to watch.

Stunning to think that the Muslim call, God is Great, has become a cry of liberty.

I do stand with these protesters.

Yettaw in Newsweek

I'd have to say that Newsweek's coverage of John Yettaw this week is fair-minded and a complete story about this sorrowful man.

It suggests Yettaw suffers from mental illness and has had a rough life.  His Mormonism, more so than in most coverage in the U.S., is part of this news story.

When I see stereotypes in coverage, I wince.  That he is portrayed as crazy and a Mormon, can't be considered as a positive way of looking at the church.  His "visions" and sense of peace at what he has done must be considered as heuristics -- shortcuts -- for the way some people view the Mormon faith.  So, that is discouraging.

But, Yettaw is Mormon.  His story is sad.  So, the story is accurate.  I suspect that most fair-minded people reading this article will not conflate Mormonism with mental illness. 

My bigger worry is for what Yettaw's odd choice may do for the future of the church in Burma.  It will be remembered that he is a Mormon, at least I perceive it will be remembered, thereby coloring a whole nation's view of the faith -- which has limited understanding of Mormonism at this time.

As it is, all we can do is trust that God will find a way to turn this for good in his due time.  He has done so before and will do again.

PBS' bad decision

Paul Fahri wrote in the Washington Post that PBS has reached a compromise about religious programming.  Programming at PBS should be non-sectarian.

KBYU in Provo, therefore, was granted a reprieve.  It will be allowed to broadcast the types of religious programming it has broadcast, but no new religious broadcasts on other PBS stations would be allowed.

I suppose that this is a good decision for KBYU -- but not that major, KBYU could simply begin to broadcast BYUTV content and be fine had this decision gone against it.

What is frustrating here, however, is the overriding principle -- getting religion off public television unless it is discussed in a sectarian way.  Otherwise, it seems, people worry the brand of public television will be hurt with religion.

Here is the trouble.  Public television should be challenging.  It should have profound discussions of religion -- even seeming to have the effort to convert at times.  Why?  America needs its religions to be part of the national conversation.  It needs religion to have access to the masses.  Otherwise, religion will seem sinister, even evil, because it is treated with silence and deference.

Let's continue to find new says to approach this issue.

Philly Inquirer

The religion section of the Philadelphia Inquirer has a terrific article this week on Mormon mission presidents going from and coming to the area.

The article does credit to LDS people and is well-written.

What I like about it -- again -- is that if reporters let us tell the story of our own lives, then we look good as a church. Rely on outsiders to describe doctrine and you get a hodgepodge.

What is evident in this story, more so than in others about missionaries that I have read recently, is that Mormons are serious people, often successful.

So, What would make a man like this give up his career to go supervise 20-year-olds for three years?

And, if the Book of Mormon is the product of a 19th century charlatan -- as is often alleged -- why do such smart people follow it so directly?  Surely, there is something to this book.

I would even suggest that there seems a quiet reverse backlash going on in the press.  Mormon people got involved in politics for proposition 8 and have received scorn.  But, Mormons are being portrayed as being serious and doing prop 8 out of principle, knowing full well that they might be attacked for doing so.  Such standing for principle is refreshing in politics.  Powerful stuff, really.

I am proud to be part of a faith that produces such people as this.

Front page of The New York Times

The New York Times had a fun piece on former Mormon missionaries who profit from selling things such as security systems door to door.

I am not sure that Pinnacle Security is exactly what we want Mormons to be, but there is much to recommend the coverage of the church, even in this way.