Check Your Sources

18 Dec 2024 - Abigail Hess

Abigail first posted this on her personal social media page. I am sharing it here with her permission.

PSA: Please be careful; News outlets are biased. Even the “Christian” ones. Of course, we have all heard this, but some of the recent articles I’ve seen and responses to them made me think it may be worth reiterating. Often I disagree with the bias held by such sources, and even the times I agree, I am unsettled by the way they propel their narrative.

I write this in particular about F7,¹ although I have noticed similar issues with various sources over the years. Though my current bias leans in a similar (yet not identical) direction to F7, I have observed that their takes can be misleading. The nature of this comes through the commentary on the facts or omitting relevant details.

For example, one recent article gave a synopsis of announcements that had been made at the Village SDA church. Of note, the thumbnail picture attached to the article on Facebook was a picture of an associate pastor making these announcements. Early in the article was the statement that some of the members “are planning to quit paying tithe to the conference.” The article missed the relevant fact that the pastor went on to encourage the members to continue paying a faithful tithe. Additionally, the pastor mentioned that several members who are the focal point of the ongoing controversies continue to pay a faithful tithe. Neither of these things were stated in the article but rather only that some members were no longer paying tithe.

I find the omission of the pastor’s full statements on tithe to hold potential of being misleading and inflammatory, because it could cause readers to assume that the church supports not paying tithe. The implications of this assumption may range from benign to egregious depending on the reader. And though perhaps unintentional, linking his face to it could have further personal ramifications. Doubtless, his true statements alone will cause a stir–no need to add a group of people who assume he implied the opposite.

Another recent article gave summaries in the form of bullet points of tidbits from a recent conference meeting. While I can’t speak for all the sources quoted, I did note one quoted source was from a Facebook post from someone I knew to be an outside observer. This was part of a list of quotes noted to be: “Public tidbits about the Tuesday Conference Meeting for MISDA pastors.”

This post did hold relevance, but I believe to quote it in that particular context was misrepresentative of the author’s intent. While I don’t see the potential impact of this being as strong as my last example, it still raises alarms in my mind. Read critically, think carefully.

I won’t tell you to stop reading F7, UpNote (I could say a lot about this one too!),² Intelligent Adventist, Fox News, CNN, or any other site. Freedom of speech and press is dear. And if you’re anything like me, the instant someone tells you not to read something, you go read it to find out why. But when you read, take it with a grain of salt, and lean more on the facts than on the commentary. If you must read, I’d encourage you to stick to the source material: the videos, documents, and direct quotes shared. Talk with real people who hold different points of view, and try to understand. We may disagree, but we don’t have to let that make us enemies.

This goes for anything you read. Even I have a bias and slant while I write this, and you have a bias while reading it. Just be aware. 😊

PS: Disclosure of some of my own biases: the pastor who made the announcement encouraging faithful tithing is my father. 🙂

Back to MISDA Controversy main page

Editor’s Notes

F7 refers to Fulcrum7, a website known for (among other things) sensational commentary on current events in the Adventist church. ↩
This remark alludes to an UpNote document that has circulated, presenting a timeline of the current controversy that is heavily skewed toward the official conference narrative. ↩