I listened to the interview. It was not about marketing, but who we were as a church. So it was dishonest of the CBC to pretend it was anything else.

I was interested in the interview becasue I went to St Andrews, went to it's Sunday School, sang in the youth choir, and  belonged to a youth group, and went to the boy scouts in a troop sponsered by the church, which used the church.

I do not know what to say becasue what I have to say is also not about marketing. The Professor is also contradicting Bibby as to why some denominations are growing and others are not. The Professor ois also ignornant of the situation in Halifax, where his conclusions would not be supported.  He actually sounds like an internet troll, by the way he uses an unrelated study he did on marketing  to make his points against the church.

Marketing is all about marketing. The product is irrelevant.

prof. Flatt is selling his study, to be published soon. You can read a more full understanding here:

http://life.nationalpost.com/2012/08/15/political-stances-on-israel-pipeline-putting-united-church-at-risk-study/

It is based on a survey of 80 students. I don't find that particulalrly convincing. He also falls into the trap of the declining church since the 60's argument, which Bibby has proved false. He is also unaware the Gretta Vospetr has been under inquiry by her presbytery at least once and not been found wanting.

Finally, as a faculty member at Redeemer University, a Christian university with foundations in the Christian Reformed Church, Flatt is required to subscribe to the Statement of Basis and Principles:

http://www.redeemer.ca/Media/Website%20Resources/pdf/about/Board-Governance-Manual.pdf

Clearly not an unbiased author.

"The authors asked 60 university students, all with an interest in religious studies, to look at online efforts and newspaper ads put out by the United Church to attract members."

I would love to know what ads and online efforts they are talking about here!

And they were probably from Redeemer University, which requires a statement of belief to attend. No bias there...

I imagine as you likely do that it was  Wondercafe and it's ads. The prof mentioned that they liked the ads, and most supported the various positions he thought they were promoting, like same-sex marriage. The WC Wedding Cake ads comes to mind. His report has not been completed, but I would agree with DKS that it will not provide much information. To get good answers that provide information, you need to start with good questions, and based on the interview and what DKS has said that, these questions are limited and biased. But we will see when it comes out.

Yes, I don't know what other ads they would be referring to. But I'm a little confused because the WonderCafe ads didn't take stands on social issues, but rather asked poised a question. "Does anyone object?" "Funny? Or ticket to hell?" "How much fun can sex be before it's a sin." etc. 

Of course, poising a question is a way of taking a stand and expressing one's theology, but the survey participants may have been influenced by their background in religious studies and expected something else from a church....which of course was exactly the point of the ads...the United Church doesn't fit preconceived notions of "organized religion."

Nearly 80% liked that the church was taking stands on the environment, same-sex marriage and other social issues.

“[But] half of study participants mentioned being frustrated by what they perceived as the United Church’s vagueness or reluctance to state its opinion on theological and social issues

It shows the bias of the person who created the study. I do not think the UCC has evr marketed its diverse theologies, thus it must be the wondercafe ads.

The Prof than goes on to ask questions based on popular notions of the UCC inside many other church denomination.

This is a common mistake we all make, when dealing with others. We need to make assumption to fill in what a person is saying. We do that by using steriotypes, that are often not true or incomplete.  A person can for example claim "People need to take more responsibility" but depending on where they come from, this can mean different things.

I notice it more than most (I believe) because of my unbalanced communication skills, and the diverse circles I move around including English and French speakers. It causes me to mistaken what others are saying, which is very clear to most, while things other people misunderstand, I am more likely to.

I actually believe that some of the particpants would actual come to some UCC if they knew more. It seems the antiUCC bias is the Professor, and likely other teachers are telling them things about "libera churches l" that is not true. Especially when the raise question around issues for which they are more informed.  

I can imagine (actually based on recent classexperience with conservative Catholic profs) many  student saying "I have no problem with same sex marriage, I know many LGBT people why can't our church accept them as they are." and in respoinse the reply would be, yes Gay people are nice, but if we accept same sex marriage, than we need to abandone the Bible and accept moral relativism , and than we would no longer be a Christian Church, and be like the United CHurch.

Marketing  our  church is difficult. One of the reason I saw the need for the remit about equal access, is that it could also be used to put out there something that all UCC agreed upon. All people are equal and we strive to include all. Which actually clear means the samething to all. , while our Statements of Faith lcan be braodly interperted.

Some random thoughts..........

This year MCC churches saw membrship/attendence grow by 25% accross Canada, due to an MCC minister presiding over Jack Laytons Funeral. I hear most of them are straight people who had nevr heard of the UCC before, and liked it's inclusive nature.

Protestantism is too complicate for peole to gasp in this world of 24 hour news cycles..

I still hear Cathjolics for example tell me that our church was created so that a King could divorce his wife. Also the Article in the Journal de MOntreal about the new moderator was good, but the picture they used was of a man dressed in a Priests outift. Thes things tend to reinforce pre exsting ideas among non UCC people.

Out of curiosity, I went onto the Metropolitan Community Church website (mccchurch.org) and found only three listings for churches in Canada - one each in Toronto, London and Windsor. So, even if people are interested in checking the out, they are only accessible to those in some areas of southern Ontario. I, for one, would love to see one in my community - I would definitely check them out.

There have been, over the years. MCC congregations in other cities. A student I once supervised in the United Church founded a congregation in Halifax, but later, sadly, died of cancer. The MCC does send those preparing for ministry to Emmanuel College, Toronto for theological training. Often the congregations are small and need a confident, solid, grounded leader, just like any church.

I'd have thought integrity would be the issue when it comes to faith? If integrity doesn't "sell" it's not a marketing issue. It's a socio-political issue.

I don't think MCC is a good comparison for this thread – MCC doesn’t really market itself …as to who/what it is.  UCC is all over the map trying to be all to everyone.  MCC’s congregations were/are made up for people longing for a place to belong and have found it!!!  I haven’t been to MCC in Toronto in many years – but my memory of the church and its people’s always reminded me of hurting/welcoming and acceptance and most important, God’s love.

Israel outlaws boycott support (re settlement exports, but NOT pork butchers' shops) in a law aimed at Jewish boycott supporters in Israel. 

P.S.

In OTHER news:

"The idea of targeting certain Israeli products did not originate in Europe. Last September, a newly formed group called Gush Shalom released a list of goods manufactured in the territories, as well as in eastern Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, urging the public not to buy them: "Every shekel we pay for a settlement product strengthens the settlers and their radical leaders," Uri Avneri, a journalist and former Knesset member who founded Gush Shalom, said in an interview this week."

So… what arewe asked to boycott?

Ahava cosmetics, sold in stores around the world, produced in Mitzpeh Shalem, a West Bank settlement.

Modan bags.

SodaStream®, Soda-Club®, AlcoJet®, Sprudelino®, Aquabar®, Gazoz®, Aquafizz®, Aquabubbler®, Penguin®, Sodamaker® Fountain Jet®, and Edition1® products.

Pladelet steel doors.

Ahdut Tehina Halva and sweets.

Ramat Hagolan dairy products.

Mai Eden mineral water.

A number of wines: Gat Shomron kosher wines; Givon kosher wines; Gush Etzion "Royal Wines"; Hacormim wines and fruit liquers; Livni wines; Noah/Hevron Heights wines (Noah, Gedeon, La Villa, Village Superior, Jerusalem Heights, and Makhpelah Special Reserve labels); Edom and Psagot wines, marketed by Royal Wine Corp. and Duty Free of America; Tura Estate wines.

And some other agricultural produce (including herbs, oranges and dates).

The EU is widely concerned and Switzerland’s largest supermarket chain, Migros, has announced it will tell its customers if products have come from Jewish settlement areas in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

WHY? What’s the problem?

As well as the international illegality of the settlements, there are reasons to be concerned such as:

NEWS:
Violence by Jewish settlers has been cited for the first time in a list of ''terrorist incidents'' in a United States annual report, as Israeli leaders condemned a string of attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank and Jerusalem.
The State Department report also detailed the threats to Israel from Hamas and other Palestinian groups in Gaza and the West Bank, and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
The inclusion of Palestinian targets reflects concern that violence by a minority of Jewish extremists could trigger a new cycle of conflict and damage prospects of a peace agreement.
''Attacks by extremist Israeli settlers against Palestinian residents, property and places of worship in the West Bank continued,'' said the Country Reports on Terrorism 2011. It referred to ''price tag'' operations, meaning violence committed by settlers against Palestinians in retribution for actions by the Israeli government or army deemed ''anti-settler''.
U.S and European officials have become more vocal in criticising settler violence amid fears it could provoke a violent response from Palestinians.
Attacks by settlers on Palestinians and their property, mosques and farmland have increased by almost 150 per cent since 2009, the United Nations says.

Here an interesting Video of a gay blogger who went to a MCC church, and talks  about his experience and what he discovered to be a good.

Cheap DIY videos like this might be effective for the UCC.  What do people think?