Leah Remini and her Troublemakers, Part 5

Posted on June 24, 2017 by Mark C. Rathbun | 23 Comments

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged Leah Remini, mike rinder, Scientology Aftermath, tony Ortega, Troublemaker. Bookmark the permalink.

23 responses to “Leah Remini and her Troublemakers, Part 5”

georgemwhite | June 24, 2017 at 12:21 pm |

Now that I understand how reality TV works, I feel more comfortable in rejecting everyone who has ever said that the discussion of Scientology scripture is worthless. At least Hubbard said what he said. I can have a choice in believing if Marcab agents infiltrated ISIS.
marildi | June 24, 2017 at 2:36 pm |

I would agree that the episodes in the Aftermath series are “scripted,” in that there is a premeditated agenda – which is primarily to focus on essentially forced disconnection. That focus in itself wouldn’t strike me as dishonest, if it weren’t for the fact that it’s too one-sided and deliberately leaves out anything that would be too positive about the core subject of Scientology, This is basically propaganda – very much the same as what they accuse the church of.
iamvalkov | June 24, 2017 at 6:28 pm |

Well, I don;t expect the show to be an exploration of Scientology. I expect it to be focused on certain negative aspects of the Church’s behavior and policies, and I don’t think there’s much wrong with that. It’s supposed to be an “expose”. Ex-poh-ZAY. I think Mike and Leah have been doing a pretty good job of that, and pretty restrained, unlike Tony’s blatant and openly anti-spiritual. anti-religious stance. He doesn’t just do yellow journalism, he offhandedly smears the religious/spiritual realms along the way.
I made a couple of posts on Mike’s blog in that Marty’s Videos thread, including one about your question of which reality show was Marty referring to? Mike did respond to that. My comments were rather arch in tone I admit, and I got piled on by 3 of the “MAAs” who watch for comments not in party lines. Thetaclear, and Wynski of course, and another guy I don’t know. They are every bit as doctrinaire and hard-nosed as what I’ve heard the Flag MAAs are reputed to be. All ad hom, all the way. I pointed out Thetaclear’s duplicity vis-a-vis commenting here in praise of Marty, and quite the opposite on Mike’s blog, all on the same day. Check it out! Their interventions are interesting, to me at least. Full of threatening bluster. They sound like Nazis! Or Stalinists, denouncing an “enemy of the Stae”.

Poor Mike! I really don’t think he enjoys having these types commenting there, but I suspect he doesn’t really have a choice anymore, although it is nominally his blog
iamvalkov | June 24, 2017 at 6:30 pm |

“Enemy of the State”
marildi | June 24, 2017 at 9:10 pm |

“Poor Mike! I really don’t think he enjoys having these types commenting there, but I suspect he doesn’t really have a choice anymore, although it is nominally his blog,”

I have to disagree with you there, Val. Mike is very much in charge of his blog, and can be very authoritarian when he wants to be. He fairly often moderates out mine and another poster’s comments (who is also pro-tech) – especially if we are making too good a point, or have a good comeback to one of his regular pilers-on. He protects them, while they pretty much have free rein to chop us to bits. I’m sure you’ve seen the latter.

Mike uses all his experience in PR – and he’s very good at it – to make sure there is more than enough to weigh the scales in favor of the negative, and just enough positive to keep up an image (even to himself, probably) of being fair-minded. His ultimate purposes may be good but he operates on “ends justify the means.” I’m not saying this with any real animosity; it’s just the way I see it.

You say, “I pointed out Thetaclear’s duplicity vis-a-vis commenting here in praise of Marty, and quite the opposite on Mike’s blog, all on the same day. Check it out!”

I’d like to see it. Which thread is it on?
Kathy D Kack | June 24, 2017 at 9:51 pm |

There is no “Up side” to disconnection as I see it.
morelivesthanacat | June 25, 2017 at 7:45 am |

Excellent evaluation of how it’s done. But these are not the only culprits. From Int PR to Gold to the mainstream media and even the alternative media–it’s all ‘perception management’ of narratives. I really wonder if there are any real journalists out there anywhere. Or if there ever were. I really do.
marildi | June 25, 2017 at 11:06 am |

That wasn’t what I meant to say. I meant that in general the subject of Scientology (not the organization but the core principles and practices) is made to look all bad. This is a biased point of view to start with, and it isn’t part of the stated purpose of doing something about the abuses of disconnection and “fair gaming.”
marildi | June 25, 2017 at 11:09 am |

Very well said. And I think you’ve just stated the larger point Marty has been trying to make, starting with some of his earlier blog posts.
iamvalkov | June 25, 2017 at 1:25 pm |

Its on the “Marty’s Videos” thread, the first one Mike posted. I haven’t checked to see if all my comments have passed moderation.
iamvalkov | June 25, 2017 at 1:38 pm |

Well marildi, it appears none of my snarky comments have passed moderation over at Mike’s blog, including the one in which I called out Thetaclear’s duplicity.
marildi | June 25, 2017 at 3:20 pm |

I tried to do the same regarding thetaclear and mine also got deleted. Why would Mike protect him – other than the fact that thetaclear sticks to the narrative so well and in such quantity. Not a level playing field.
Miss Tia | June 25, 2017 at 4:44 pm |

I will first say that I have not watched either of Leah’s shows. Hearing Marty describe the set up he said Gibney borrowed and how Leah borrowed made me recall that Ortega would do that (I’m assuming still does) in the bunker. Ortega, who portrays himself as a journalist–who are suppose to be objective, would write something with his opinion woven in and then have someone ‘official’ back up his opinion, thereby to those fully immersed, appear valid. I was once fully immersed there.

Well known examples are how he wrote about Marty’s family and the lawsuit being dropped, why would they do that? Don’t speculate though; but then he has a member who’s a Texas lawyer, in his piece back up what he’s said about Marty and they speculate together. Then his piece about a private Scientologist, who’s been named but really shouldn’t be anymore so I shan’t, who wasn’t properly–to him–grieving over her daughter’s suicide. So he bring out a therapist in the piece to agree with him, riles up readers against a mother who lost her daughter who wasn’t grieving the right way. Aside from there is no right, or wrong, way to grieve, what an intrusion into a private Scientologist’s life at such a tragic time. And never mind he, nor the therapist, considered the mother might be dealing with her loss in accordance with her faith, Scientology. And really, even a public Scientologist should not be intruded upon in a time of grief. No parent should ever bury their child.

No objectivity. One sidedness. It’s not just Ortega, who says he’s a journalist, it’s across the board even with well-respected reporters and news channels. People need to seek out the other side on their own, when in most instances, especially in the case of reporting, it should be presented. I understand the show is Leah’s, so she can do what she wishes with it, it’s just a shame they don’t allow some objectivity and show the other side. It could strengthen her points, or could weaken them; but it show a willingness to present the Scientology side of things.
iamvalkov | June 25, 2017 at 6:25 pm |

I think Marty’s observations about the technique used in “Aftermath”, of Leah and Mike basically structuring the show by providing summations and evaluations of the guest’s telling of their experiences, are very spot on. However, I’m not sure that some of that isn’t necessary. Here are some of my thoughts I posted on Mike’s blog:
“…it would be silly for anyone to think that no management of perception and narrative takes place, especially in the making of tv shows which cost a lot of money to do, and are playing for big stakes in capturing and holding the interest and attention of potentially millions of viewers. There are “documentaries”, docuseries, docudramas etc. There simply has to be management going on. Otherwise there would be a lot of chaos and unhappy backers losing money, producers getting fired, etc. The show in question is a “human interest” show. As such it has to interest humans. There are bound to be elisions, omissions, narratives to promote etc.”

Marty is pointing out some of the specific nature of these things, and the targets of his observations are taking umbrage. They see him as attacking them. Their responses mostly seem very subjective to me. I don’t really understand why Mike is being defensive about it all. I think he feels his honesty and integrity are being called out, but I think he is doing the best he can to follow his Code of Honor to the the extent he sees his way clear to doing so.

Marty is, well, Marty. He has always been blunt and in some ways less than tactful. But I do not sense any meanness or bad intentions towards any of these people coming from him in these videos. I suppose his choice of words comes across as somewhat harsh at times, and some of it is just his own opinions and evaluations that I don’t necessarily agree with, but overall it just seems plain-spoken to me. Perhaps that is his experiment?

Some of the comments and observations over there that do I think strike a nerve is that Marty seems to be reading notes or a script much of the time. I haven’t seen him do this before to this extent.
Richard | June 25, 2017 at 8:30 pm |

The “ThetaClear” (capital C) who posted here might simply be an impostor of the “Thetaclear” (small c) who posted there.
iamvalkov | June 25, 2017 at 8:49 pm |

Yes, that occurred to me too.
marildi | June 25, 2017 at 9:58 pm |

I’ve seen him spell it in different ways – capitalizing the T or the C or both or neither, and with two words or just one. So I don’t know. But you may be right – it was hard to believe that he would post that. Thanks, Richard.
marildi | June 25, 2017 at 10:33 pm |

Valkov: “Some of the comments and observations over there that I do think strike a nerve is that Marty seems to be reading notes or a script much of the time. I haven’t seen him do this before to this extent.”

To me, it just seemed like Marty had prepared ahead and made notes so that he wouldn’t forget any of the points he wanted to make. The fuss and conjecture about him reading from notes is just one example of how much people read into things depending on their bias – or on the way they want to characterize it. MIke’s blog is a microcosm of this. And as you said, “Perhaps that is his experiment.”

Great post, Val.
marildi | June 26, 2017 at 12:11 am |

I meant it was perhaps Marty’s experiment, with regard to how people would respond.
iamvalkov | June 26, 2017 at 12:25 pm |

I kinda think Marty doesn’t really have an “agenda” as such, except to tell the truth as he sees it. I guess he really feels pretty free to do so, regardless of what some people may think as a result. That’s admirable, in my book.
And I agree about the notes. He can waste little time doing the videos if he uses notes, rather than trying to memorize a script.
marildi | June 26, 2017 at 4:42 pm |

“I kinda think Marty doesn’t really have an ‘agenda’ as such, except to tell the truth as he sees it.”

I agree about him telling the truth as he sees it, but I don’t think he would spend a lot of time and effort on something only because it was the truth. His time is more valuable than that. He must have some objective and I’m pretty sure he will eventually say what it is.
Anonymous | October 24, 2023 at 9:06 pm |

Me Tone 40: WHERE IS SHELLY, Buddy Marty punching me in the face according to L Ron Hubbard Black Eye Policy.
Anonymous | November 24, 2023 at 10:06 pm |

Hidden Camera: Secret Scientology Meeting