Mormon Discussion’s podcast production is certainly not connected to The Mormon Church aka The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It also is most assuredly not approved or endorsed by Intellectual Reserve, Inc or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Any of the awesome content or the solid opinions expressed, implied or included in Mormon Discussion Inc’s awesome podcast lineup and production are solely those of Mormon Discussion Inc. and/or its program hosts and not those of Intellectual Reserve, Inc. or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Mormon Discussion Inc is a 501(c)(3) and is in the arena of journalistic work and is part of a free press. A free press is fundamental to a democratic society. It seeks out and circulates news, information, ideas, comment and opinion and holds those in authority to account. The press provides the platform for a multiplicity of voices to be heard. At national, regional and local level, it is the public’s watchdog, activist and guardian as well as educator, entertainer and contemporary chronicler. Under the “fair use” defense, however, another author may make limited use of the original author’s work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism.
The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner’s exclusive rights.
Subject to some general limitations discussed later in this article, the following types of uses are usually deemed fair uses:
- Criticism and commentary: for example, quoting or excerpting a work in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment. A book reviewer would be permitted to quote passages from a book in a newspaper column, for example, as part of an examination of the book.
- News reporting: such as summarizing an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report. A journalist would be permitted to quote from a political speech’s text without the politician’s permission.
- Research and scholarship: perhaps quoting a short passage in a scholarly, scientific, or technical work for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations. An art historian would be able to use an image of a painting in an academic article that analyzes the painting.
- Nonprofit educational uses: for example, when teachers photocopy limited portions of written works for classroom use. An English teacher would be permitted to copy a few pages of a book to show to the class as part of a lesson plan.
- Parody: that is, a work that ridicules another, usually well-known, work by imitating it in a comic way. A comedian could quote from a movie star’s speech in order to make fun of that star.
Good observations, RFM (as usual). Your Gen Conf episodes are so interesting. Thank you for taking the time to entertain and inform your listening audience. Your efforts are greatly appreciated.
Hearing about your Japan mission was enjoyable, for I, too, have ridden the bullet train (from Tokyo to Hamamatsu). Also my brother was one of the missionary/interpreters for visiting GAs during the Tokyo temple dedication. Cool to hear your experience.
Best regards,
Linda
PS “Don’t Stand So Close To Me” was an awesome and appropriate song for ending this podcast. Made me chuckle out loud!
Couple observations. Conference talks are submitted weeks if not months ahead and timed down to the word, corona was not yet an issue. A few talks by top leaders included some Corona information, I’m sure last minute additions due to necessity. These talks are done early for one reason is to be translated into other languages for conference, also to keep a very specific time
frame. Each speaker is given an exact time frame to stay within. I know personally a member who does this. Also members were given notice to get handkerchiefs the day before as I recall.
RFM, thanks as always for your commentary.
With regards to the new proclamation, one thing has struck me that isn’t being discussed online as far as I can tell. You say that the proclamation mentions the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood by Peter, James, and John, and I’m sure that pretty much everybody listening to conference would agree with that. But what the proclamation actually states is, “Three of the original twelve Apostles — Peter, James, and John — restored the apostleship and keys of the priesthood authority.”
The reason I find this significant is that some orthodox members, including Richard Bushman, believe that Peter, James, and John did not restore the Melchizedek Priesthood, but rather restored the keys of apostleship. I wonder if some in the Q15 are aware of this non-traditional belief and if they intentionally worded the proclamation in a way that accommodates it. There’s no way of knowing, but I think it’s worth considering.
Also, one minor point: The church does not actually count The Living Christ as one of its six proclamations. I see no practical significance in declaring something to be a “proclamation”, so this fact is neither here nor there.
I didn’t realized that President Nelson (Rusty) offered a disclaimer to not realizing himself on memorable this general conference one.
Imagine this general conference without the Hosanna Shout, Logo, & Proclamation, and this would have been perhaps one of the crappiest general conferences of all times.
I think they need the tip to record their speeches then transcribe them, a piece of advice that I certainly intend to follow.
Maybe it’s time to sign up to toastmasters, church isn’t giving me enough airtime to hone in my speaking skills.