Muckety

Scientology comes to YouTube

By Emily Morgan

May 1, 2008 at 1:00pm

The Church of Scientology has a new way to reach the masses - via YouTube.

Hint: Click in map to explore connectionsStory continues below interactive map 

Click to activate this MucketyMap
Click to activate interactive map
(requires Java)
MAP HINTS: Click expands a name. Control+Click centers map on a name. Solid lines are current relations. Dotted lines are former relations. For advanced tools choose Tools > Options from the menu at top. More help. Not seeing the maps? Please go here to check for the latest version of Java.

The Scientology Video Channel launched this week, providing users with more than 80 informational clips, about three hours of video content, to introduce the faith to the public.

The Scientology Video Channel provides the following description of the church: “Scientology is a religion in its highest meaning, as it helps bring man to total freedom and truth. The essential tenets of Scientology are these: You are an immortal spiritual being. Your experience extends well beyond a single lifetime. And your capabilities are unlimited, even if not presently realized.”

The videos are separated into categories, including “Beliefs & Practices,” “Anti-Drug,” and “The Way to Happiness.”

Scientology has been known as the religion of various Hollywood A-listers, including Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Lisa Marie Presley and Jenna Elfman. The Scientology Celebrity Centre markets the faith to the rich and famous.

In January 2008, unauthorized footage of Tom Cruise discussing Scientology hit YouTube and spread across the web, garnering over 2 million hits in the first few days it was online. After the footage leaked, public fascination with Scientology was apparent.

In the clip, Cruise appears to be a complete fanatic. He laughs manically while announcing: “We are the authorities on getting people off drugs. We are the authorities on the mind” and “We are the way to happiness.”

Unlike the clip of Cruise, the videos produced by the Scientology Video Channel are unable to be embedded in blogs or other websites, which will obviously limit the ability of the videos to be shared. They are marked on YouTube as “Embedding disabled by request.”

Below is the video of Cruise, the distribution of which was not approved by the Church of Scientology.

Click here to sign up for the Muckety Newsletter



This post is tagged with: , ,
 Read related stories: Media · Video  

6 Comments

  • #1.   Jim 05.01.2008

    $CIENTOLOGY IS A GLOSSY, SHINY RIP-OFF AND THEIR VIDEOS ARE A HOOK TO GET YOU SPENDING MONEY. ALONG THE WAY YOU ARE HYPNOTIZED (AUDITED) SO YOU WILL GIVE THEM EVERYTHING DOWN TO YOUR LAST DIME. XENU.NET IS WHERE YOU WILL FIND THE TRUTH ABOUT SCIENTOLOGY

  • #2.   Terryeo 05.01.2008

    Myself, I’m in mirth. Critics of Scientology spend significant money in bandwidth, take significant risks stealing documents, video, seeking out information they can use to further criticize the Church, its adherents, its philosophy, its founder, etc, etc. The result? Two million hits on a stolen video. Amazing. The Pope doesn’t get such coverage! Who are the critics working for? Who pays their salary? Who pays their bandwidth and legal costs?

  • #3.   David Mudkips 05.01.2008

    This is probably the most inane “internet” strategy I’ve seen Scientology employ to date.

    For a clear idea of how stupid of a move this is, go to YouTube and enter “scientology” in the search box and see what comes up.

    Thousands upon thousands of videos with all kinds of damning evidence about their abuses.

    I guess they think they’re somehow “countering” all of the negative information about them on YouTube by hosting their own propaganda there. They, very clearly, do not understand the Internet or its denizens very well.

    Good luck with the new strategy, Scientology! You’ll need it.

  • #4.   vainglorious bastard 05.01.2008

    $cientology needs more money so they can get the cancer causing asbestos out their facilities.
    They should have stopped the danger seven years ago when they found out about it. I can’t believe they would endanger their own members. Maybe $cientology Cult has fixed it so they are in the last will and testaments of the all the cult members. I’m just trying to figure out why a good cult like $cientology wouldn’t remove dangerous asbestos as soon as they found out about it. $cientology shouldn’t endanger people with cancer. that’s a bit evil, and uncaring.

  • #5.   Centurian 10 05.02.2008

    TERRYEO IS AN OSA SHILL AND NOTHING MORE. He’ll deny it as he has on a thousand posts, saying he knows tons of people in it or others have posted under his name. Truth be told, he’s a shill for the cult of scientologys black ops group. This group called the Office of Special Affairs WAS called the Guardians office. The group busted by the FBI during Operation Snow White and Operation PC FREAKOUT (Google both terms). For more on Terryeo check out http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Terryeo

    For more on the criminal cult of scientology:

    http://www.forum.exscn.net/index.php?
    http://www.exseaorg.com/
    http://theunfunnytruth.ytmnd.com/
    http://whyaretheydead.net/
    http://www.xenu.net

  • #6.   Egon 05.02.2008

    Terryeo, your comments sound FAR too forced. If you want to be effective at misinformation you have to seem like an ordinary person, not using all these strange phrasings and idiosyncrasies that nobody in the real world ever uses. Also, it may be hard for you because you don’t have any, but you have to use real evidence to support your claims.

    And anyways, this is the internet, everything is stolen here.

Leave a Comment


Chicago Muckety
September 12, 2008
May 28, 2008
May 27, 2008
May 23, 2008
May 22, 2008
  • Search for stories
      
    Special Features
    Muckety Newsletter
    Keep up with all things Muckety!
    Subscribe to our Muckety email newsletter for a list of recent stories and a glance at what's new.
    Email:
    Categories
    Special Features

We make every effort at Muckety to ensure that our data is correct and timely. However, relationships are in constant flux and we cannot guarantee accuracy. If you come across incorrect or outdated information, please let us know.