Entertainment Tonight serves as a mouthpiece for Scientology on Going Clear

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Entertainment Tonight serves as a mouthpiece for Scientology on Going Clear.

The article: 8 Burning Questions We Have after Watching HBO’s Scientology Doc, ‘Going Clear’

http://www.etonline.com/news/161844_9_burning_questions_hbo_doc_going_clear/

Starting with the most important point first:

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

5. Did Nicole Kidman know of the wiretap allegations on her phone when she was married to Cruise? One former Church member -- who's largely been discredited by the Church -- claimed they wiretapped Kidman’s phone in order to undermine her relationship with then-husband, Cruise. (She did not participate in the documentary.)

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

The word "discredited" links to Scientology's Freedom magazine as follows:
Code:
http://www.freedommag.org/hbo/videos/exterminating-gibneys-propaganda.html?source=gaw&gclid=CKiSq-_DnsQCFReTfgodxU4AIw
Seriously? Entertainment Tonight comes to the conclusion that Mark "Marty" Rathbun has been "largely discredited" based solely on the word of Scientology Freedom magazine, and without first communicating with him? Without doing any investigation? That is what passes for journalism at Entertainment Tonight?

Next:


* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

6. Does anyone remember that Cruise allegedly dated Homeland actress Nazanin Boniadi? In the documentary, it’s purported that the actress was selected and groomed to be Cruise’s next girlfriend. However, their relationship reportedly lasted three months.

Google and Getty Image searches show no results of them to together, outside of Vanity Fair’s expose on Cruise’s relationships. The article also reports that Scientology representatives deny any sort of search or audition took place.

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Is Entertainment Tonight seriously questioning whether Tom Cruise and Nazanin Boniadi dated based on the fact they don't turn up together in image searches? Did it ever occur to Entertainment Tonight that they may have dated privately? Did it ever occur to Entertainment Tonight to, oh, I don't know, do journalism and ask Nazanin Boniadi if she dated Tom Cruise? Ask Tom Cruise if he dated Nazanin Boniadi? Ask Marueen Orth about her Vanity Fair story? Is Entertainment Tonight seriously suggesting that Marueen Orth and Vanity Fair got it wrong to the extent that Nazanin Boniadi never even dated Tom Cruise? And doing so without doing any actual reporting? Without bothering to ask anyone? Based on image searches?

Also, while "[t]he article also reports that Scientology representatives deny any sort of search or audition took place": (1) not even the Church of Scientology denies that they dated and that a relationship "took place"; and (2) Entertainment Tonight is again taking the word of the Church of Scientology without investigation or doing anything remotely related to the practice of journalism.

Next:

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

4. Why didn’t Gibney reach out to Katie Holmes for comment? Cruise’s third wife started studying Scientology soon after she started dating the actor, but no mention of her was made throughout the entire film nor was she listed among those the production reached out to. a

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Um, ask Katie Holmes about what? About the wire-tapping of Nicole Kidman a decade before? Out of the two hour Going Clear documentary, that is one of Entertainment Tonight's eight "burning questions?"
 
Last edited:

Sindy

Crusader
My comment:

ET, Marty Rathbun in no way has been discredited by the "Church". Are you seriously citing that ridiculously juvenile and vitriolic smear video as an authoritative source?


You need to go back to the drawing board and dig deeper. How superficial is your knowledge?


BTW, though it may seem over the top for me to ask you this but after what we now know about the C of S I think the question is valid: Were you paid by the C of S to write this piece? Maybe promised an interview with Cruise?


Watch what enemies you lay next to in bed.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Perhaps the OP was too rough on Entertainment Tonight. Is it possible that Entertainment Tonight was not shilling for Scientology, but instead the author of the Entertainment Tonight article was merely a pathetically incompetent hack who would be kicked off a high school newspaper for not having the faintest idea what journalism is? :confused2:
 

JustSheila

Crusader
No, OP, ET is pretty blatantly shilling for COS. Almost straight out of FreeDumb website. All cocka poo poo.

The author of the article is either a Scientologist or had a Scientologist write this or do the "research".

And we know all about Scientology's concept of "research". Shame to see ET going that way, but most magazines don't have a very long life, anyway. I would hazard a guess that ET is on its way out. This sort of stupid journalism isn't even good enough for the backs of comic books anymore. It's a competitive market, and they're not cutting it.
 

MissWog

Silver Meritorious Patron
Okay, I've been thinking this for the last few weeks...but on my iPad I am not diligent about saving sources..

Long & short of it is, sooo many articles use the word FEW, as in David Miscavige gives few interviews, implying he gives any! as in a few of ever??? Or never?? Just say in'
 
Top