Teen Mania Communication’s Consultant Caught in a Lie

Today’s post is written by Mandy, a Global Expeditions alumnus. As you read, please keep in mind Teen Mania’s definition of a lie: “the intent to deceive.” (2021 Update: The blog has since been privatized.)

My name is Mandy, and I went on two mission trips with Teen Mania Ministries sixteen and seventeen years ago. I first learned about their summer missions, now called Global Expeditions, at an Acquire the Fire conference I attended with my youth group. Recently, I posted a blog post on my personal blog about my experience with Teen Mania Ministries. To summarize my post, I stated that as I have grown older and become a critical thinker, I have become concerned about what I experienced and whether or not it was harmful.

I never intended to post my experience on Recovering Alumni. In fact, in my blog post, I even voiced concerns about the Recovering Alumni website. However, I think that parents of potential Honor Academy and Global Expeditions participants should be aware of the response I received on my blog.

A person by the name of Cindy made a comment in response to my blog post. Please feel free to look at my original post and her comments so that you know I am not taking her comments out of context. One portion of her comment reads:

I’ve been doing a lot of research on Teen Mania since watching that documentary, and overall most of what I’ve read are positive stories about how Teen Mania is changing student’s lives and helping hurting teens find healing through Christ.

Sure, there will be mistakes and problems in that organization, just like in ANY organization. That is because Teen Mania is run by humans, who are mistake- prone and need grace too.

I hope the readers of your post do think critically about what is happening at Teen Mania. Keep in mind that people who’ve had a bad experience are more likely to speak out and have more of an emotional reaction in their comments than those who have had a positive one. I don’t always leave shining reviews of restaurants on Yelp, but if I have a bad waiter, or the food wasn’t right, I make it a point to leave a review. Get the picture?

When I read her comment, it struck me as something I would have heard when I participated in Teen Mania programs as a teen. I looked up the email address that she provided to make the comment. After searching online, I discovered that Cindy is a Communications Consultant for Teen Mania Ministries. Additionally, the IP address she used when commenting is registered to Teen Mania Ministries. Furthermore, her Twitter account indicates that she is working for the organization.

Cindy’s post on my blog is unethical because she did not disclose that she has a material connection with Teen Mania Ministries. She implied that she was a neutral third party. Not only does her LinkedIn account indicate that she is working as a consultant for Teen Mania, her Twitter account indicates that her sister is looking into the Honor Academy. It is well known among marketing and PR professionals that employees or individuals who have a material connection to an organization should disclose that relationship when they make posts on blogs about the organization. Bart Lazar (2010), an attorney and partner at Seyfarth Shaw Attorneys at Law, wrote:

If employees are permitted to blog about their [organization’s] products/services (which is considered by many to be the practical approach these days), employees must clearly and conspicuously disclose their relationship with the employer…Employers should avoid encouraging untrained and unmonitored employees to blog about their company’s products and/ or services, just in case the employer is subject to suffer loss to its goodwill or be found to engage in unfair or deceptive practices, such as astroturfing. (p. 20)

Some might wonder if this code of ethics applies to nonprofit organizations. Yes, it does. For example, the nonprofit organization, Give Well, came under scrutiny when two employees posted on blogs and other forums but did not disclose their affiliation with Give Well. It is considered so inappropriate, that Give Well has an entire webpage devoted to the actions it took in response: http://givewell.org/about/official-records/board-meeting-3/FAQ-on-inappropriate-marketing

Further, Katya Andresen (2008), a professional who blogs about non-profit marketing asserted:

In the Web 2.0 world, no matter how good your intentions, you pay a big price for misrepresenting yourself. In your job, please never be tempted to AstroTurf. Don’t anonymously post good things about your organization or bad things about others without identifying yourself, because it’s unethical in my view. And if that’s not incentive enough, know that those tricks tend to get discovered. They will estrange and enrage the very people you set out to influence. You and your cause will get burned. (para. 8)

To Teen Mania and Cindy, what you did is unethical. Your actions only add to my concern about Teen Mania Ministries. Parents, if you read positive comments about Teen Mania Ministries, I would be careful to make sure the comments are authentic and not created by employees or paid representatives. I was made aware of another blogger that had a similar experience with another Teen Mania employee making comments on his blog without disclosing his employment with Teen Mania.

I never intended on writing a post for Recovering Alumni. Teen Mania, you should have taken Katya Andresen’s advice. How should parents trust you with their teenagers when I cannot even trust what you write on my blog?

Andresen, K. (2008). Astroturfing burns. Be authentic or else. Posted at: http://www.nonprofitmarketingblog.com/comments/astroturfing_burns_be_authentic_or_else/
(2021 Update: Link points to Wayback Machine)

Lazar, B. (2010). Drafting social network policies. Information Today, 27.5(May2010), 20.

38 comments:

laynesays:January 12, 2012 at 9:44 AMReply

Ohhh ho ho. That’s just too funny, much like TM editing/trying to censor their own wikipedia page.

Mandy, thank you for the well-written/researched post.

Mandysays:January 12, 2012 at 10:01 AMReply

I am a marketing professor. So, as soon as I traced it, I was stunned. It is considered deceptive by the field. It is a big no no.

Guardiansays:January 12, 2012 at 10:02 AMReply

I also find it REALLY funny that members of TM staff post comments on this blog. How do we know? IP addresses are registered to the ministry, yet the poster is Anonymous, thus resulting in another breach of ethics. Makes me wonder how ethical Teen Mania Ministries business practices really are!!!

Future Cult Leadersays:January 12, 2012 at 11:00 AMReply

Ethical and “Teen Mania Business Practices” do not go hand in hand. They don’t even pay all their “employees” and some of the ones they do are paid such petri dish wages that they can’t afford to live and go into debt. Debt that God frowns upon. Hmmm. Yes – I have personal experience from being a Staff Associate.

That redheaded onesays:January 12, 2012 at 11:14 AMReply

I would suspect that ethics and Teen Mania are things that don’t happen. It’s why most of their “staff” are just interns who stayed past their second or 3rd year. If someone really studied ethics then tried to find them in Teen Mania they would come up wincing!

shannon-ashleysays:January 12, 2012 at 12:02 PMReply

When I look back on the lessons taught to me at the HA, it was all ethics and honor and accountability…. according to the HA. According to Dave, according to Ron, etc. There was little attention paid to meeting mainstream expectations, you know the ethics or values of secular business. Because TMM sees itself “above” that.

It’s all really just a big excuse to allow TMM and its staff to take their message to the ends of the earth, by whatever means they feel are necessary.

Mandysays:January 12, 2012 at 12:11 PMReply

It concerns me because what if they are commenting on teenagers’ blogs and not disclosing that they have a material connection to Teen Mania.

Even still, the Communications Consultant should know better.

Abbysays:January 12, 2012 at 1:01 PMReply

Wow Mandy – that’s a really good point. How many times are posting on kids blogs saying how great TM is, without disclosing their relationship with TM?

Hmmm…

jami c.says:January 12, 2012 at 1:15 PMReply

Great post!

Ericsays:January 12, 2012 at 3:42 PMReply

@Layne, a glance through the page history will show that TM has indeed edited their own Wikipedia page repeatedly, censoring the controversial content, and in fact gotten their IP address blocked for repeated violations. Conflict of interest, much?

@Mandy, great post. My understanding–some of those with experience can chime in here– is that HA actually employs people to monitor the internet and leave comments on blog posts like that. First, that’s clearly the “intent to deceive,” violating HA’s own “Tenet #1” not to mention every other ethical standard. Second, if you have to pay people to say how great something is, how great can it really be?

Of course the bigger issue is that it casts a similar suspicion on all other Pro-TM comments. Since TM is willing to show “intent to deceive” to make themselves look good, why should we trust anyone else who says they had a good experience?

By the way, lest poor Cindy be given the blame for all this, here’s another blog you mention in the article with a very similar pro-TM post by a different commenter, who was also busted when he turned out to be from TM’s IP. This isn’t Cindy’s fault; it’s a pattern. http://estewartartist.blogspot.com/2011/12/teen-mania.html

Ironically I bet some of these comments are the ones we’ve seen where Recovering Alumni and the “Mind Over Mania” documentary are accused of “bias.”

Mandysays:January 12, 2012 at 3:56 PMReply

I find it all very ironic because Ron Luce indicated that MSNBC was “dishonest” and came to Teen Mania “under false pretenses.”
http://www.christianpost.com/news/teen-mania-founder-msnbc-documentary-is-deceptive-60902/

Umm, hmm. Pot calling the kettle black?

juliesays:January 12, 2012 at 5:49 PMReply

This certainly explains why so many of the Anonymi keep belaboring the same few points everywhere on this site.

Doug Duncansays:January 12, 2012 at 9:17 PMReply

I find it disturbing that these so-called “Christians” seem to adhere to a lower standard of ethics than one would expect from any responsible adult, regardless of whether or not they are religious. If, as Jesus says, “By their fruits you shall know them,” I don’t see how Teen Mania can claim to have any sort of divine endorsement.

Mandysays:January 12, 2012 at 10:16 PMReply

Hey Eric, that commenter on the other blog is TMM’s Social Media Manager. Not good.

Carl Litchfieldsays:January 12, 2012 at 11:37 PMReply

I can hardly say that I’m surprised by this. It isn’t really the first time I’ve seen Teen Mania violate ethical standards to make their own point. I recall a letter on the now defunct Response website. It was from a professional psychologist. He talked about how his son had been an intern and the HA had a positive effect on his son’s life.

One of the first thing I learned about psychology ethics is that you cannot have more than one relationship with a client. The psychologist cannot offer a professional opinion on the impact of the HA on his son’s life because he cannot offer a professional opinion on his son, period. He mentions casually knowing other former interns, but unless they are his clients, he cannot offer an opinion on their lives either.

In reality, the letter was just a parent proud of their child’s accomplishments and satisfied with the role the HA had in those accomplishments. However, by stating himself as a professional psychologist, the letter attempted to mask his position as a professional opinion, which he cannot actually offer.

One could argue that Teen Mania didn’t know that the letter was unethical, however the psychologist should have. I know, it’s gone now, but it always rubbed me the wrong way.

Anonymoussays:January 13, 2012 at 12:02 PMReply

Cindy’s comment reminded me of Heath Stoner and Dave Hasz.
they way she asked all those questions that dont make sense.
who does that?

Guardiansays:January 13, 2012 at 2:34 PMReply

Anon, you just named TWO people who do that!!

Esthersays:January 13, 2012 at 4:10 PMReply

This is my Twitter conversation with Cindy, starring an appearance by the awesome Mandy, who clarified something I hadn’t thought to. I’ll post more as it occurs.

Me: oh, are you an intern?

Cindy: Going through gauntlet week and meeting great people. What about you?
Me: Alumni
Cindy: Cool 🙂
Me: So when do you graduate? Are you an August sitting through January Gauntlet or a January going through your first Gauntlet?
Me: I don’t seem to have gotten a response to my tweet, did it get lost?
Cindy: Aren’t you an RA blogger? Why didn’t you identify yourself? How many interns are you contacting the same way?
Me: I’m quite open about my affiliation with the RA community and I was honest about the fact that I’m Alumni.
Also, I don’t contact interns. I contacted *you*.
I’m still waiting for you to clarify what you said, btw. Not planning on forgetting that any time soon.
Mandy: RA is not an organization. It is just a bunch of individuals. She is not an employee.
Me: Thanks for clarifying that. I am also not the main organizer, and I never misrepresented myself.

Anonymoussays:January 13, 2012 at 5:36 PMReply

Carl, good point. Since any psychologist worth his/her salt would know it’s a breach of ethics, makes you wonder if that person wasn’t a psychologist, and maybe not even a parent! Maybe some staffer wanting to sound credible & beef up the “testimonials” page?

Anonymoussays:January 13, 2012 at 7:34 PMReply

Soooo… Cindy is an intern?!?!
W.
T.
F.?!

Recovering Alumnisays:January 13, 2012 at 7:55 PMReply

No, she’s not an intern. There was some confusion about that because of her tweets…but she is an adult who works as their communication consultant. It does appear that her sister is a current intern.

Mandysays:January 13, 2012 at 8:57 PMReply

I think her sister is only looking

Ericsays:January 13, 2012 at 10:40 PMReplyThis comment has been removed by the author.

Ericsays:January 13, 2012 at 10:42 PMReplyThis comment has been removed by the author.

LizBRsays:January 13, 2012 at 10:45 PMReply

@Eric: This is nitpicky in regards to TM paying people to post things on blogs, but I think we need to be careful to differentiate between TM employing people to manage social networking and web presence (totally okay and ethical business practice) and Teen Mania employees/consultants misrepresenting themselves like what has happened here (unethical).

I think there has been plenty of evidence that TM has hired SEO and social networking employees, but that in itself isn’t unethical.

Teen Mania is totally justified in hiring people to manage their social and media presence. However, as Mandy so well explains in her post, this is a misuse of that strategy. I just don’t want people to confuse legitimate SEO strategies and social media management with what appears to be happening here.

Ericsays:January 13, 2012 at 10:54 PMReply

(Let’s try that comment again and see if I can do it without breaking the HTML. Sorry!)

Further red-handedness. Teen Mania has repeatedly edited their own Wikipedia page (see the history on their page where their IP address continually appears) to censor any controversial content, such as deleting any references to the unflattering news reports on ESOAL. Here’s the incriminating user page on their IP.

Note especially the most recent moderator comment:

“You have been blocked again, for longer. For seven years you have been carrying on a concerted campaign to bias Wikipedia in favour of Teen Mania Ministries, and suppress any information unfavourable to the organisation. It is amazing that you have lasted so long with only a couple of short blocks. Also, please do not attempt to evade the block by editing from a different IP address, as you did the last time this IP address was blocked.”

For seven years! This, obviously, is yet another massive conflict of interest and against Wikipedia’s own terms of service. (I’m sure Mandy can provide some examples of the other times when corporations have been caught doing this and been highly embarrassed in the media.)

The wise words of How Cults Work are relevant as usual: “Legitimate groups have nothing to fear from their members reading critical information about them.”

Mandysays:January 13, 2012 at 10:58 PMReply

LizBR is correct. Hiring SEO, social media, and inbound marketing employees is completely acceptable…and necessary today!

Editing your company’s (or a company that has hired you to edit) Wikipedia is not ethical and it violates Wikipedia’s policy.

I told Cindy this is was the way to respond to my blog: If you wanted more info[rmation about what I meant in my blog post], the appropriate, professional, and ethical way to handle it would have been to write, “Teen Mania hired me to help them with their promotion of different ministries…I’d like to know more about your concerns.” That is a completely different tone.

Ericsays:January 13, 2012 at 11:02 PMReply

LizBR: Agreed. In fact my current day job involves SEO and social networking presence for a publisher, so I’m naturally OK with that.

However, a company editing their own Wikipedia page directly violates Wikipedia’s terms of service (see WP:Conflict of Interest), not to mention being very obviously deceptive. A quick trip on Google will reveal news stories of several companies and individuals who got massive PR black eyes (at very least) for doing just that.

Esthersays:January 13, 2012 at 11:36 PMReply

I have to apologize. She’s not an intern, she gave me the IMPRESSION she was an intern in the course of tweeting.

Shannon Kishsays:January 14, 2012 at 2:55 PMReply

Wow, for someone that has only been working for TMM for a less than a month, you are not off to too great a job there Cindy.

Gabriellesays:January 14, 2012 at 9:24 PMReply

The comment Cindy made about a bad experience at a restaurant reminds me of the anon 9:20 post on my story http://www.recoveringalumni.com/2011/08/gabrielles-story.html
about a bad experience at disney land.
Seems that it might be a popular to compare teen mania to a restaurant or vacation.

Timothy Burnssays:January 14, 2012 at 9:41 PMReply

Seems like you are really reaching just to have a reason to say something negative. That doesn’t fit into the framework of seeking reconciliation, which above all else, Jesus calls us to. Check out 2 Cor 5.18.

I love you guys, and am praying for the RA bloggers.

Tim

Recovering Alumnisays:January 14, 2012 at 10:29 PMReply

Tim, you don’t love me or anyone here. You have displayed that with your comments and your blog that CONSISTENTLY minimizes our pain and enables our abusers.

You are not welcome here.

Mandysays:January 15, 2012 at 7:46 PMReply

Tim, I told Cindy (see comments on my blog) that I would be willing to talk with them about my concerns. I never heard back from Cindy until I reached out to Mr. Luce on Twitter. I also emailed Cindy and Mr. Luce about my concerns and expressed ways they could write on blogs ethically, more professionally, and even more strategically.

Also, I sought wise counsel from people who are wise and not at all involved in Teen Mania or RA to ask them if they thought my situation warranted posting on a blog I have expressed concerns about.

How is this blog post reaching?

Anonymoussays:January 15, 2012 at 8:11 PMReply

Let’s just say for a second that the restaraunt comparison is legit…would you go to a restaraunt that had reports of roaches in the food? Even if only say, 1 in 10 or even 1 in 50 people had that experience?

Ericsays:January 16, 2012 at 11:15 AMReply

Also, if the service was terrible or the food was bad, then the restaurant deserves to get a bad review, doesn’t it? And the bad review is thus completely accurate (even if it’s “biased”), and should serve as a warning to future customers and an incentive for the restaurant to improve.

As Anon points out, a restaurant that responded to negative reviews by saying “Only a handful of disgruntled customers have ever complained about finding rat droppings in their hamburgers” would shortly go out of business, and no loss to the world.

Of course, maybe this is a moot point as Yelp has no shortage of positive reviews for services that are actually good.

wanderersays:January 31, 2012 at 9:42 PMReply

Question: is it part of orientation to hand out “pat responses” to new interns? I’m wondering if they’re given several “options” of how to deal with any kind of criticism.

What I’ve heard from basically EVERY SINGLE TM supporter is:

a) Of course there are problems, just like any organization BUT….. (fill in the blank)
b) Our leaders are only human, after all BUT (fill in the blank)
c) Sure, there were some not-so-great things that happened when I was there, but (fill in the blank)
d) throw in some reference to putting on your “big girl panties”.

Seriously. It’s kinda creepy how everybody seems to say the same thing.

kolchaksays:March 7, 2012 at 1:37 AMReply

Timothy – i came across the HA parents blog before and the word ‘enabler’ came to my mind, too. for being a blog that focuses on “good news,” you certainly have a lot of confrontational posts focused on the RA bloggers, cults and the Duncans that is filled with belittling language.

(side note: the last post that i read gave a list of why the churches of the jehovah’s witnesses and mormons are a cult – a list that, from my experiences, just as accurately describes TM. though we weren’t actually ‘members,’ we were led to believe that on-fire-teen-mania-christian-missionaries were actually fulfilling G-D’s call to the christian community while all of the other christians were just pretending and wasting His time.)

sadly, that whole blog is just empty rhetoric that bounces around and lands nowhere. RA’s 100% correct that when that blog proves the RA community is wrong and that TM is right, they are absolutely enabling TM. and, worse still, they are painting an unrealistic picture of TM for potential intern’s parents by quickly dismissing the concerns raised here. telling a wounded person that there is no reason that they should feel hurt doesn’t really come across as loving, does it?

and, getting to the point of this post, the whole masquerade of posting on a blog and posing as someone who has been doing research after watching the TV show is totally lame and childish. is this really who is running TM’s PR? and if she was gonna be misleading, didn’t she think of posting under a different e-mail address?