Broadcasting Still Permitted Considering Handbook 1?

Using the Church Webcasting System, YouTube, etc. Including cameras and mixers.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34487
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#11

Post by russellhltn »

rpyne wrote:I find this whole thread interesting in light of the fact that BYU-TV (still) broadcasts sacrament meeting over cable and sattlelite TV at least once a week.

But, I'll bet it's done with permission "from above". IIRC from an article some years ago, it's not a "normal" meeting, but staged.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 11475
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:27 pm
Location: US

#12

Post by lajackson »

rpyne wrote:I find this whole thread interesting in light of the fact that BYU-TV (still) broadcasts sacrament meeting over cable and sattlelite TV at least once a week.

You will notice, though, that it is not a normal sacrament meeting. Many of the important elements you would normally see on Sunday at church are not broadcast.
lionelwalters
Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:38 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

#13

Post by lionelwalters »

I know this question was posted almost six months ago and has been addressed by different people, but it is one I've wrestled with myself and have recently come to some understanding about. I believe that the policy relates directly to the priesthood keys the stake president holds for his geographical jurisdiction. The term "broadcast", especially when dealing with the Internet, suggests making the meeting freely available to people outside of the boundaries of the stake. But I think this means more than just streaming a meeting using a commercial service such as uStream. For example, I recently received an e-mail from a friend, who received it from a friend, who received it from a friend, and so on, which was sent by a young single adult on the other side of the world inviting family and friends, also apparently from other parts of the world, to view a local stake fireside. While I'm sure the meeting was inspiring and good - as we hope all Church meetings are - the authority of the stake president to conduct a Church meeting for the spiritual benefit of others extends only to the borders of that stake. In this case the fireside was inappropriately "broadcast" by individuals within the stake e-mailing the webcast link to others outside the stake. On the other hand, appropriate use of webcast involves sharing the link only with trusted individuals with the express understanding that they are to use it at their meetinghouse or home within the stake and not share it unless authorised.

Having said all that, an interesting point to consider around this topic is that the term "broadcast" is used both in the prohibitive policy as well as the one that allows the use of Internet broadcast technology for stake conferences. Perhaps this could imply that under the stake president's direction an Internet broadcast of stake conference could be used to bless a wider audience of both members and non-members within the stake, such as members being encouraged to e-mail the link to family and friends within the stake. For example, it could give a non-member who is nervous about coming into a chapel a positive first glimpse at a local Church meeting and a unique opportunity to feel the Spirit at home, thus boosting their confidence and desire to attend the next local Church meeting. Stake conference is an obvious choice because it doesn't involve a priesthood ordinance that would be inappropriate to broadcast (i.e. the Sacrament) and the talks and musical items are generally of a predictably high standard. This may be an overly liberal interpretation of the policy, so I suggest any stake president who has concerns confer with the appropriate area leaders.
Post Reply

Return to “Non-Interactive Webcasting”