MusicScribe BLOG

David Bruce Murray
Mar 01, 2008
In The News|Observations

Imperials Lawsuit Links and Commentary

The Imperials have posted a detailed response to the recent Christianity Today article, “The Imperials Embroiled In Lawsuit Over Name.”

If you take the time to read the response rather than simply knee-jerking, you will come to understand that Christianity Today’s article is nothing more than shoddy one-sided journalism. Even if you agree with the sentiment portrayed in the article, it is clear that the concerns of the current Imperials were not fairly represented.

I’ve used the following example before and I’ll use it again. It would be wrong (in the moral, ethical and legal sense of the word) for Brian Free, Ivan Parker, and Mike LeFevre to hit the road singing and billing themselves as Gold City. Very few would argue with this point. The situation with the Imperials really is no different. It doesn’t matter that some of the former members were more popular. The current group is the only group that should carry on the legacy as the Imperials. That doesn’t mean another group can’t be made up of former Imperials members and mention that they happen to be former Imperials. They shouldn’t be billed or introduced AS IF they were the current group.

The outcry against the current group is only taking a toehold because the Imperials had virtually disappeared from the public eye when the group changes occurred. This group has been trying to bring the name back, and they’ve been  somewhat successful at it. (For the first time in many years, the group has had a single on the Singing News chart, for example, rising into the Top 20.) It also bears mentioning that Jeremie Hudson and Jason Morales have been singing with the Imperials for NINE years, including several years with Armond Morales before he retired. Shannon Smith has been with the group for FIVE, including a couple of years with Armond Morales before he retired. And Armond Morales approved of Ian Owens as his replacement.

Sarah Pulliam’s and Christianity Today’s lack of journalistic integrity has forced this private matter into public view to the detriment of these chosen heirs of the Imperials legacy. That’s shameful. Time will tell whether or not they will prevail despite the deck of public opinion and perception being stacked against them.

3 Responses to "Imperials Lawsuit Links and Commentary"

1 | The Imperials Lawsuit « Burke’s Brainwork

March 4th, 2008 at 11:48 am

Avatar

[...] do have to agree with David Bruce Murray’s take that the reporting by Christianity Today was obviously slanted and a major disappointment coming [...]

2 | John

March 5th, 2008 at 12:46 pm

Avatar

There should be no “disappointment” that Christianity Today made a “private” disagreement a “public” matter. A lawsuit is a public document. The decision to take this issue to the courts was a decision to make it a public matter.

3 | admin

March 5th, 2008 at 1:18 pm

Avatar

Mr. Styll,
Reporting on the matter is one thing. I am objecting to the bias displayed by this report. It’s subtle in some ways (putting the word “real” in quotes and using Armond Morales’ first name while refering to the younger group members in a less personal manner), but it’s there.

The petty “he said, but he said” is the private matter I was refering to in my article. Christianity Today could have reported on this lawsuit without taking sides or trying to lead readers to take sides.

Musicscribe Home - SGHistory.com - CD Reviews (since 2004) - Review Vault - Services - SG Reporter - Daniel Britt - Kyle Boreing - Submit A CD For Review


Singing News—Southern Gospel Magazine

By TwitterButtons.com


CD Reviews

Unless otherwise noted, all CDs reviewed on this website were furnished to the reviewer free of charge. This notice is posted in order to comply with changes in Federal Trade Commission guidelines. These guidelines falsely assume bloggers who write reviews will automatically give positive favor to any product they receive for free.

Copyright

All textual content posted at Musicscribe.com and sub-folders is owned and copyrighted by David Bruce Murray unless otherwise indicated. No reprints may be made without the permission of the author, except as provided by US Copyright law. Permission IS granted to reprint articles on other NON-COMMERCIAL websites as long as the following conditions are met:
1) All articles must be reprinted in full with no editing or additions
2) The words "by David Bruce Murray" must be displayed prominently with each reprinted article.
3) A link to the original article at Musicscribe.com must accompany all reprints.

If your site meets these requirements, you may reprint articles without requesting additional permission from the author.

The copyright of all content posted by Musicscribe.com contributors other than David Bruce Murray is retained by the original authors.


Contact Us

Click Comments under any post to respond!

Categories

Archives

 

September 2010
S M T W T F S
« Aug    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930