« Un-Christian attitudes towards gays, cont... | Main | Church Advertising »
An update...
...on those NCMO loving, DTR avoiding 'Can't-ies' I discussed a few weeks ago...
I had originally seen the ad in the BYU student newspaper on a recent foray to campus. Turns out that I wasn't the only one who wondered if the message wearing a "I can't...I'm Mormon" shirt sends says more or less you're unhappy with the things the Church tells you you can't do and secretly wish you could.
And the response of all those other BYU students? (Do you have to ask?) Why, ban the ad from the newspaper, of course...
The T-shirts aren't exactly a 'celebration of the goodness of LDS living', of course...but I'm having a hard time seeing the 'offensiveness' of it. (I'm too many years removed, I guess, from being a student at BYU--where 'being offended' is like a mandatory second major...) The maker of the shirts defends the purpose behind the shirts in the above article which makes some sense, but I still won't be buying them for my kids anytime soon...
I also had a laugh-out-loud moment when I read that some of the offended BYU students complained about one of the female models' "overly provocative pose". Man...I miss being at BYU. (Now, if she had been wearing a 'NCMO' shirt...)
Side note: Since my initial posting, the site in question (www.icantimmormon.com) has added helpful subtitles to the product page to explain the terms DTR, NCMO, and VL. Undoubtedly, this is because they are faithful readers of "The Baron of Deseret" and read the comments to the earlier post from non-Utah natives who were having trouble figuring out what those somewhat obtuse terms meant. Yes, "The Baron of Deseret"--your online instrument of social change and community service...
UPDATE: Here's the BYU NewsNet article on the controversy with a few more details. "NCMO", sure...but what's so controversial about the "VL" shirt?
September 28, 2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/1175632
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference An update...:
Comments
If there were a Mormon version of Rolling Stone magazine then there would be an appropriate forum for ads like this.
Posted by: danithew | Sep 28, 2004 12:19:58 PM
Overly provocative? Hmmm, they must have taken it off the site. Or maybe they're talking about the bald guy.
Posted by: Kim Siever | Sep 28, 2004 1:07:14 PM
Looking at the site, I see the exact same pictures I saw the first time I visited two weeks ago so I don't think they've taken any down (in fact, they've added one, it looks like...) It's possible the 'controversial' print ad was different than what's on the web site, but I doubt it--the original print ad I saw two weeks ago was from the same set of pictures. Unless someone can demonstrate that the 'controversial' print ad picture was different (and more 'provocative') than the ones on the site, I think we can chalk this up to the old adage: "For any object that exists, there also exists a BYU student somewhere who will find it offensive..."
Posted by: The Baron | Sep 28, 2004 2:27:15 PM
What gets me is the "flip-flop" by the BYU newspaper staff. It's one thing to have an agreement with Sports Illustrated, who then later inserts an inappropriate ad. However, when the newspaper first accepts an ad, I assume they are given some explanation of what the ad will contain (otherwise, how do they know what to put in the ad to begin with?). So at first, the newspaper obviously saw no problem with the product being advertised, and they were sticking to their "high standards". Then, after people start objecting, the newspaper shifted its opinion and pulls the ad. So my question is, does the newspaper staff really stick to high standards? Or just the standards they can get by without having people object. It the ad was ok to begin with, what changed?
Posted by: Kevin | Sep 28, 2004 2:49:21 PM
I dont think many people are concerned with the Daily Universe's flip-flopping, everyone I know sees the whole newspaper as a joke anyways. I do agree that people on campus get fired up about trivial things for no reason, the shirts are not that bad. Being a mormon from outside of Utah, this is actually a phrase I used a few times in high school. In fact, I even had this phrase used for me. I had several close friends who were non-members, and though we didn't spend much time together outside of school (because it is a guaranteed fact that drinking or drugs would be involved with any of their activities), every once in awhile when we did spend time together someone would offer to go back to their house and pick up the case of Bud that their parents bought earlier that week. It was great to hear things like "Jenna can't she is mormon". That wasnt a negative thing for me (and they didnt mean it in a negative way), I was/am proud of myself for standing up for what I believe in, and glad that I had friends who cared to know about what I believe. Something I still hear today from people my age is the phrase "Oh so you don't drink and stuff like that" after people hear that I am LDS or that I go to BYU.
Posted by: Jenna | Oct 1, 2004 4:17:11 AM
I saw this article on the Deseret News website and forwarded it to Jim Romenesko's Obscure Store (www.obscurestore.com). He then posted it to the site. This is read by many in the media (of which I'm a part of) and is picked up by wire services. Since I sent it to him, the story has received a lot of play. Other stories I've sent to him in the past week have to do with the Stanford/BYU debacle and another one that I can't think of right off the bat. I've found that the Deseret News has a lot of good stories. I recently talked to Jeff Vice, their film critic, and he seems like a friendly enough guy.
Posted by: Andrew W. Griffin | Oct 1, 2004 10:41:33 AM
