Well I think that’s a bit of an unfair criticism. The title “Can You Pray the Gay Away?” with the question mark at the end was supposed to be rhetorical because I think these days, most people recognize that you can pray the gay away as much as you can pray the Asian away. [laughs] Or pray the black away. It has never been proven. In fact, it’s been disproven by reputable medical associations. The title was to really inspire people to watch the show.
—Lisa Ling, host of OWN’s Our America and who recently hosted a piece about ex-gay camps, reveals media’s worst kept secret: we add question marks to titles to make things appear more interesting than they really are. Will Wayne Besen back off now? [via]
Chris
It’s not so much the title, it’s the shoddy journalism and research she did for this program that was the direct criticism. I hope she gets that at least.
Shannon1981
This is what I wrote on AfterEllen in response to a post that is pointing out that gays were not Ling’s target, but fundies were, and hence the approach.
I am definitely coming from a place of great anger here.
and it doesn’t help that I was in the student union at school just now and these fundies were sitting RIGHT BEHIND ME, talking about how being gay is a sin.(and yes, they know. I don’t hide anything- their bs was on purpose).
So keep that in mind as I write this. Yes, people can-and do- change. But crazy religious zealots are nothing more than cult leaders. To that end, we need to realize that they will not bend. I see what you are saying, how maybe we can reach some anti gay parents of gay kids and fence sitters, and, while they may not change their views on gays, they might see that these places do not convert anyone because they can’t, and not bother sending their kids.
I just think these people are dangerous and should have been portrayed as such. The genera public was presented with a presumably reasonable debate, when, indeed, that is a lie. The case was closed long ago, but the zealots won’t see it. I say out law their camps as child abuse. They’re already a hate group. IDK why what they do is even legal.
link to the thread on AfterEllen: http://www.afterellen.com/people/lisa-ling-oprah-winfrey-network-pray-the-gay-away?page=1,2#comment-1407048
AfterElton: http://www.afterelton.com/people/lisa-ling-oprah-winfrey-network-pray-the-gay-away?page=0%2C2
Fitz
I’m praying the Asian away right as we speak. Whore. Lets hope she dies in an alley with a baseball but up her twat.
dvd
I watched the show and think she’s getting a bad rap. Her job is to interview and listen, not take a side. Though it was VERY clear she was not believing the Ex-gay side, and the show was so beyond more positive towards the those who reject such organizations.
I felt bad with the subject who was struggling with being in Exodus, but it’s up to him to figure it out, not for Lisa Ling to tell him.
nowliveit
I think the title is smart and not offensive at all.
I also like her approach to stories. She brought it together well while maintaining that almost-forgotten journalistic neutrality.
Steve
The title isn’t offensive. Hell, it isn’t even smart or clever. IT’S A FUCKING QUESTION! You know, those thigns that you do research to fidn the answer to. It’s sad that she has to defend the question she was researching. This really just proves that people will get upset over anythingf or no real reason.
christopher di spirito
I briefly met Lisa Ling at a LGBT event a few years ago in Los Angeles. She’s not even remotely homophobic. She’s cool.
SteveC
I don’t believe for a moment that Ling is homophobic. However I do question her journalistic integrity.
As she says herself, ALL reputable medical organisations state that sexual orientation cannot be ‘cured’.
Therefore why is it necessary to give a platform to clearly disturbed people without emphasising that they are regarded as abusive quacks by medical experts.
Danny
@Steve: so if her next show asks the question: “Should women really be allowed to vote?” That would be ok with you? In the most literal sense, yes it’s a question. But our position is that it’s a question that’s been asked and answered many times over and to continue to pose it as a question, even under the guise of exposing ex-gay groups, is offensive. Shoddy journalism.