John Quinones has proven himself to be very antagonistic toward polygamy. He likes to sensationalize the lifestyle and try to lump us all together as criminals.
Mark Henkel the founder of TruthBearer.org has put together a very interesting article detailing the so called reporting style of Quinones, his lack of objectivity, and his willingness to deceive others.
Following are some excerpts from the article:
John Quiñones deliberately lies to normal people in their everyday lives. To dupe such unsuspecting real-life people, the show [“What Would YOU Do?”] hires actors and actresses, writes a script, and intentionally sets up completely fake scenarios. Each made-up story is then used as a soapbox for Quiñones to portray himself as the would-be “moralist” judging the same real-life people to whom he and the show had lied in contriving each set-up scenario.
On past news magazine shows such as ABC’s “PrimeTime,” Quiñones had often “reported” about “polygamists.” But he exclusively targeted his focus on one single Mormon sect, the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints (FLDS), where real crimes were involved. The FLDS share roughly 99.9% in commonality with “mainstream” Mormons (LDS), even though the LDS try to deny the FLDS are “even Mormon.” But having so much more in common with Mormons than with consenting adult pro-polygamists around the country, the FLDS are, in reality, a Mormon sect more than anything else. Yet, Quiñones always identified the Mormon sect, FLDS, as “the polygamists” or “the polygamist sect.”
In the subsequent years, Quiñones performed even more “polygamy reports” for ABC. In every case, he slandered all of “the polygamists” by using the same one example of the subdivided Mormons. He never presented the real facts about the national movement, and he never mentioned other forms of polygamy – ranging from Christian polygamy to secular polygamy to any other form of consenting adult polygamy. Unfortunately, Quiñones really has proven his willingness to lie to make his money and fame when “reporting” anything about polygamy.
Mark Henkel goes into detail about the show “What Would YOU do?”, John Quinones’ lack of expertise on polygamy, and also Elissa Wall’s lack of expertise on polygamy. It is an interesting article.
Merrywives' Blog 
I thought Quiñones’ story on Centennial Park a couple years ago was very fair and open-minded. I did not think it was antagonistic at all. Everyone I have shared the program with has come away with a very positive impression of your community.
This Henkel fellow, on the other hand, is very antagonist toward Mormon polygamists and resents how most of the publicity surrounding polygamy is focused on Mormons instead of his little band of evangelical Christian polygamists. From his article, to which you link, “Not once has he ever reported about all of the various forms of normal polygamists who do not even believe in anything Mormon-based at all.”
Henkel considers us Mormons to be abnormal. Henkel is jealous that Quiñones reports on Mormon polygamy instead of Henkel’s little and obscure (not to mention poorly-designed) website, which he claims to be a national movement.
I take things Henkel says with a huge lick of salt. His press releases and articles are very self-serving and very dismissive of Mormons. And he does not realize that you are not FLDS! He is as woefully uninformed and negative as he accuses Quiñones of being.
Now, I do agree that this show of Quiñones’, “What would you do?”, especially the “FLDS child bride” episode, sounds cheesy, ridiculous, tacky, and dishonest. Actually, it sounds stupid. But the fact stands that I thought Quiñones was very fair to CP when he profiled the community.
It’s been a long time since I saw the Primetime Show on ABC, but I do remember seeing the FLDS sandwiched in to give “balance”. No interviews from them concerning their views, but always through the eyes of the anti-polygamists.
We are not associated with the FLDS much, and it is amazing how little interaction we have had, and how little we knew about them, after being seperated for over 20 years. Since they have been speaking out for themselves more, and not leaving it up to other people with an agenda of their own, things have changed recently, and we have had more interaction and association with some of their members.
I agree that Mr Quinones did some of the interview well, but I didn’t care for the way he set up the “race issue”. We have a firm belief that we are all God’s children, and all are welcome to our church meetings.
The main issue I have is with the new series “What Would You Do” and found my own feelings expressed very well by Mr. Henkel. As for our belief in the Prophet Joseph Smith ( the very foundation of “Mormonism”), better put: The Gospel of Jesus Christ, Joseph himself said that his name woul be known for good and evil among men. With us his name is revered and known for good. Others may think as they choose.
Susie, I agree about the “What would you do?” show. It was in very poor taste and was ridiculous in its very premise. I guess my big problem is with Henkel, who does not respect Mormons at all.
P.S. I guess I don’t remember Quinones asking about race in the interview in CP. It does not surprise me though. I am sure you all get tired of those questions. I do remember the “balance” he showed by driving through Colorado City and getting stern looks from residents.
It does make me happy to see the FLDS becoming more neighborly, not just in Short Creek, but in Texas as well. I think a little PR on their part will do a world of good, once the anti’s aren’t the only ones setting the press’s agenda.
R – it sounds like you have more of a personal vendetta than a real issue with the article that was written. It is a shame you feel the need to smear someone rather than judge the piece for it’s content.
Dear S.:
I apologize for giving that impression. That was not my intent.
I do not know Mr. Henkel. I have no vendetta against him. I just know he writes lots of articles and always throws in anti-Mormon statements. The article referenced even manages to get a few digs in at Mormons.
I am sorry to appear otherwise, it just bothers me when the article claims that Quinones is trying to smear “normal polygamists”, while in turn, the author of the article wants to make it known that Mormon polygamists are “not normal”.
I think the divisiveness is sad. I support rights of free association for all persons, and I don’t think it serves any good to call some people normal and imply that others are less than normal.
Years ago I corresponded with Mr. Henkel and he was adamant that Mormons are not normal, and I see his views have not changed. Nevermind that if polygamy is legalized or decriminalized, it will likely be because of Mormons, and possibly FLDS Mormons.
I thought the article was a thinly-veiled smear piece against Quinones, a vendetta, if you will, based on Quinones always paying attention to Mormons instead of Henkel.
But I do agree that Quinones’ show, as referenced, is absurd, dishonest, deceptive, and tasteless. Quinones needs to get off the anti-FLDS bandwagon. And Henkel needs to get off the anti-Mormon bandwagon. As Benjamin Franklin said to the signers of the Declaration, I say to all who believe in polygamy: “We must all hang together, gentlemen [and ladies]…else, we shall most assuredly hang separately”.
I’ll stop now, before I say anything else that will give the wrong ideas.
I truly don’t have any vendetta or personal ill will toward anyone involved. It pains me that I gave that impression.
Peace and goodwill to all,
R
I agree. R. has a vendetta. Funny how people always claim to personally know national people like Henkel. I see R. misusing the “normal” word as a vendetta perspective. Henkel’s article points out how Quinones always uses Mormon polygamy, specifically FLDS who commit crimes. Most people outside of Utah are not Mormon. So, Quinones uses the Mormon polygamists to keep nonMormons opposing polygamy because they are not in favior of Mormonism itself. Its clever and Henkel is exposing it. Henkel differentiated the different forms to show that Quinones does not make the differences. That means Mormon polygamists were already differentiated when Henkel said normal polygamists. From what I read, when Henkel added the word “normal” he was not saying Mormon polygamists were abnormal. He was referring to all other polygamists. So out of ALL OTHER POLYGAMISTS that are not Mormon Polygamists, he further differentiated ONLY THE NORMAL OTHER POLYGAMISTS. I don’t see Henkel jealous at all. Do a little research online. He has been fighting nationally years before anyone knew about the FLDS. He brings something to the table that Mormon polygamists simply cannot do, because he is NOT Mormon. I see him pointing out that nonMormons should stop opposing polygamy based on their opposition to Mormonism. He is pushing to have polygamy be judged for itself without Mormon connections. That’s good for Mormon polygamists too. Then all polygamy, including Mormon Polygamy, will stop being oppressed as long as they are about adults and not forcing it on anyone. So I wonder if R. is an anti-polygamist trying to make Mormon Polygamists hate Henkel for reasons that do not exist.
While I personally find the idea of sharing my husband with other women absolutley disgusting, I support the right of other people to make that choice. I don’t think that the government should dictate people’s sexual practices. I do however, have a big problem when adults force those decisions on children. I recognize that not all people who practice polygamy involve minors, but since so many polygamists have been dishonest about the ages of the brides how can the government know if the law is being broken or not without monitoring those who practice that lifestyle?
Also, having been a victim of spiritual abuse, I know how powerful a hold the church can have on a person’s life. God is interested in our hearts much more than every action we take. He is not a bully who says, “Do this or I will burn you in hell!” I took a step outside of what I had been trained to believe and I have been blessed.
Re: Lucia
I agree with you. No one, either children or adults, should be forced into decisions that affect their lives against their will. “In every way be good and kind, but never force the human mind.”
I am very sorry that you had a bad experience, but feel good that you have come to a feeling of gratitude of your blessings. I feel this is important to every soul.
We understand that plural marriage is not for everyone, but many of us have very happy and productive lives. We love the children in our community, the good ladies, and appreciate the hard-working, good fathers and sons. We are not perfect in any way, but hope to become better and better in our lives.
Thank you for writing to us, it is nice to hear from you.
I have a real problem with this show. It doesn’t take into account people’s emotions or feelings. What if someone had called 911, would they have taken services away from a real emergency?
What about the emotional stress and discomfort of people who are just trying to enjoy their time? It isn’t fair to stage these shows and scenarios for profit. ABC should know better. I’m not just talking about this scenario either, one of these days what would you do could have a real problem on their hands. What if someone had gotten so upset about one of these scenario’s they had a health problem emotions can stir up heart problems, asthma attacks, etc.
But my real problem comes in with this… What if the next time a similar situation is real and people don’t respond because they think it’s just another show or something staged? What if this prevents someone from getting help? Someone who truly needs it…
It’s crying wolf…..
Wow. I just learned about this show from this post and from Brooke’s blog. How horrible! I used to work in emergency services 911 dispatch and I would be very unhappy if someone called me and wasted precious time with a fake emergency, as we were constantly busy with real emergencies! John Quinones and his producers need to step back and consider whether the ends justifies the means. And that’s assuming there even is a valid goal in all this nonsense he’s pulling (and I don’t think there is). Yes, he clearly has an anti-polygamy thing going.
I would almost bet that all the people who came forward to “help” the “victim” were also paid actors. The premise of the show is a lie, so is it much of a stretch to think the so-called “good samaritans” are anything more than actors?
I would definitely be leery of Quinones and ABC next time they want an interview in Centennial Park. They cannot be trusted! I remember the interview he did there a few years ago; it seemed like he was always trying to find some way to make y’all look odd or weird. Now he’s pretty much shown his biases.
Ron S.
Speaking of Quinones interviews, what ever happened to Laurene Jessop?