Mars Hill Church leadership has decried “Negative Media Attention” and blamed it for a decrease in both attendance and giving.
For us ex-members and perhaps many members we see the following “trustworthy table”. The most untrustworthy from our perspective would be considered negative, and the most trustworthy would be considered positive. We consider truth as positive, and self-serving spin and obfuscation as negative. We will look at the media spin about the current Mars Hill mess from negative to positive.
News source
General Characterization
Comment
Mars Hill Church communications
Very untrustworthy
Full of accusation to dissenters and bloggers, lack of transparency, hides truth often.
Other Christian New Outlets (World Magazine excluded)
Untrustworthy
Usually are printing puff pieces seemingly written by Mars Hill PR firms and surrogates.
Daily Beast/Huff Post
Moderately Untrustworthy
Seems to like to pick the sensational and skew perspectives toward a biased view.
New York Times
Trustworthy
Solid journalism
Forbes
Trustworthy
Solid journalism
The Seattle Times
Trustworthy
Solid Journalism – keen to correct any errors
The Seattle Weekly
Trustworthy
Solid and caring journalism.
The Wartburg Watch
Trustworthy
Written with a heart for abused people
World Magazine
Very Trustworthy
Warren Cole Smith has become the nation’s foremost investigative reporter within Evangelical circles.
Wenatchee the Hatchet
Very trustworthy
A totally accurate narrative with keen observation and a ferocious commitment to accuracy.
Warren Throckmorton
Very trustworthy
Daily reading for most members and ex-members of Mars Hill Church and the rest of the evangelical world
The Stranger
Very trustworthy
No tabloid journalist spent more time to make sure that he understood the context and accuracy of the events at Mars Hill Church than Brendan Kiley (Link)
Who would have thought that the least trustworthy of media would be Mars Hill Church and other Christian outlets, and the most trustworthy The Stranger?
Musings from under the bus. 