Mormon Pollster Gary Lawrence: We Want Negative Buzz

conspiracy theory Public Relations

Catch Gary’s latest YouTube clip:


The LDS pollster hired by two anti-gay campaigns (Yes on 8 in California and Yes on 1 in Maine) reveals his thoughts on how the Mormon church benefits from generating “negative buzz” …

Mormon Strategy #4: We Welcome Buzz

People think, “Well, we don’t like contention.”

Of course we don’t like contention. But buzz is when people start talking about us.

“Even negative buzz?” And I say, especially negative buzz …

The question came up, “What if we have protestors?”

And I said, “Wonderful…”

Because if you don’t have protestors at the temple, go down to the local Rent-a-Mob and hire some. We need local buzz. We need negative buzz.

Previous episodes of Gary on the Net:

Son of Prominent Yes on 8 Leader Quits Mormon Church Over Prop 8
Gary Lawrence: Familiarity breeds contempt (for Mormons)
Prop 8 Q&A with Mormon Pollster Gary Lawrence
Prominent Mormons Paid Handsomely for Winning Prop 8

8 thoughts on “Mormon Pollster Gary Lawrence: We Want Negative Buzz

  1. Does anyone know if he gave a reason for his assertion that negative buzz is good?

    Does it help publicity?

    Is it because it helps further the idea that it’s Mormons against the world?

    Does it invite sympathy from moderate non-members?

  2. You can see Gary’s complete presentation and also a panel discussion at the attached link.

    Several points that Gary makes:

    1) Antagonism is preferable to apathy.

    2) Increasing contrast prevents identity from getting lost in commonality.

    3) The LDS church is not even keeping up with world population growth. It will never be big and should operate accordingly.

  3. Well, this sort of affirms what I already thought the church was thinking about these things. I mean, they have a persecution complex. They WANT persecution, it makes them seem more special or… something (mostly something, in my opinion).

    I half wonder if they really did hire protesters for some of the rallies.

  4. I’d like to leave a comment about our apparent loss in Maine. As the returns came in, some of the folks from the opposing side began leaving messages for me, like this one:

    You guys ran a magnificent campaign, you completely out-organized and out-raised us.

    Didn’t matter in the slightest.

    32-0.

    And here’s my response to that jab and to the Maine result generally:

    With every vicious campaign that you guys run, you do more to advance our cause than we could ever manage on our own. Thank you for that, and I mean that sincerely.

    Without folks like you and NOM, we never would’ve had the opportunity to run our ads showing the real families that are impacted by your campaigns. Fear is a powerful motivator, but in your case, you’re relying mostly on fear of the unknown to motivate your voters. At the end of the day, voters in Maine, even the ones who voted against us this time, were afforded the opportunity to contrast the real people they saw on our side with the fictitious monsters described in your ads. Sure, still too many voted their fears, but you’ve now played a part in helping to dispel some of that fear. So, thank you again for your efforts.

    Yet another bittersweet result. Washington and Kalamazoo appear to have gone the right way, while 48% of Maine voters now find themselves on the losing side. In the latter case, it seems nearly certain that Maine will legislate equality again next year and in 2010 will host some kind of Question 1 redux. Sigh.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *