It's a fine line that requires some thought, but I believe it's one that every person using social media for an organization should consider. For example, I work with refugees. I have TONS of great photos of refugees smiling and embracing, etc, but I don't use them because it feels exploitive. It feels icky. Also with Afghan women at least as well as some Iraqis, the women don't want their images on social media at all. That's their prerogative and I respect their choices. If I do use an identifiable photo, I get permission first. So our social media accounts are boring and not updated very often and include a lot of pictures of food, as well as a lot of pictures where you can't see anyone's face. This may be part of why we're so woefully underfunded, but ultimately my refugee friends are more important.
I love your approach to this. Better to have a "boring" account than exploit vulnerable people. You're treating them as real people with agency, not mascots to further your cause and bring in fundraising...!
I work with refugees as well - for the safety of the populations we work with, we would never post identifiable pictures of our friends on social media! That’s such a security risk. And not to mention, dishonoring to their privacy.
I’m also thinking about the families who have experienced or are experiencing domestic violence. Or other violence (like stalking). Can you imagine what could happen if a perpetrator located his/her victim on church social media?
Are churches not required to have signed media releases?
It's time to start having these conversations. It's like everyone started copying each other and I just can't help but wonder if anyone has paused long enough to consider the pitfalls of using worship as content? Also, why are churches calling it an experience instead of a service? I had never been at a church like that until recently, and we left for many reasons. But changing service to experience never sat right with me. Thanks for being bold in your writing and shining a light on these issues!
Thank you! You're right -- the shift to calling it an "experience" rather than worship is significant. The focus changes from sacred time with God, with him as the audience to our worship... to some kind of entertainment program, with us as the audience and other people performing for us. Yuck.
This won’t surprise you: I always felt weird when I saw the photographer in church. I was instantly taken out of worship and felt self conscious about how I worshipped—hands up? Hands down? Eyes closed or open? Please don’t take my picture! She tried to be unobtrusive, walking around the edges, but she had a camera in a sacred space. I hated it.
idk abt that idea, it can be abused in some way for lack of accountability unless we seek God wholeheartedly and still meditate day and night. it was alsoa written that we shall not neglect fellowship with other believer as irom sharpens iron.
In the past I've heard people dismiss the idea of "home church," but since our experience I can certainly see the appeal in it! There's likely a very different set of priorities.
Our Web and social media teams use photos and video of worship - the video is streamed inside the building and on YouTube, Instagram, etc. Our tabernacle is somewhat large, and there is a fire aisle about 1/4 of the way back. If you sit in front of the fire aisle, or come down to the altar area, it's likely you will be photographed. If you sit farther back, getting photographed is unlikely. There are many reasons people sit in front of the fire aisle and almost certainly one of them is to be seen (and that's not entirely negative. Our pastor has told the staff that he appreciates seeing us in worship).
I had not considered your concerns. You have given me a lot to consider. I hope we are not guilty of using the people whose images we capture until they are no longer useful. But I am not part of the team that plans the services, or the social media or Web content.
Yes, there are so many things to consider ... it's an area where I think churches often have followed the culture without realizing these practices could "disciple" people in the wrong direction. Jesus said the hypocrites did all their works of piety "to be seen by others," and we can all benefit from asking whether our worship is veering in that direction (personally or corporately).
I suppose I didn't make it clear in my post, but I haven't brought this concern directly to my former church. When the photo was initially posted, I didn't think through all the issues at all, so I never mentioned it then. Now we are no longer in the same church or even the same state, and I wouldn't attempt communication with the pastors after the abuse we experienced. I do hope others can be helped by all of this, however!
I think you make a good point about the churches using content to make church look appealing rather than share the Gospel. As a relatively new believer it seems a little strange as there are so many lost people out there, and perhaps it would be a better 'church growth' strategy to go out and share the Gospel as Jesus told us to.
Yes! You have a great perspective on this. And I think much of the problem is that we’ve made “church growth” the goal. People become a means to that end. Jesus never tried to “grow” his following. He sought genuine relationships.
"It wasn’t about sharing the gospel, it was about making sure people heard the gospel in our church." So much to think about here. Thank you for sharing your experience, Joy.
I love that you have opened up conversation with this topic. I left a church that was extremely concerned with its image and brand, and I was part of the photography team, which always put me in a position of having to discern what to frame and capture, and for what purpose. Our photography team leader and I shared a similar belief (I don't think this was necessarily promoted by the church – it was just our personal feelings on the matter) that we would photograph the backs of people's heads, hands raised, as silhouettes against the light of the stage, but I didn't photograph people's faces because it felt intrusive. "Worship is intimate and personal" was sort of our motto. For all of the things my old church did wrong (and there was a lot), I am proud that those of us who personally served on the photography team did our best to not exploit individuals for the personal gain of the church's brand. That said, this church still did the exact same thing that you have described in sacrificing individuals on the altar of their brand and image, and I have absolutely no doubt that the photography/film/social media elements were a part of that wider picture.
On the flip side, the church I began attending after leaving this larger, flashy church, is genuinely lead by some of the most humble people I have ever met. They asked me if I would come in for a single weekend to take some photos simply so they had some imagery to put on their website for those who might be researching the church and want to get an idea for the look and feel of the place. We discussed announcing to the whole congregation, over several weeks, that there would be a photographer in on a specific Sunday so that they had autonomy over whether they were photographed. On a regular basis, they only photograph a service if it's a baptism or a baby dedication, and it's posted from a place of genuine joy and celebration, like "We are so overjoyed at what Jesus is doing in x's life and we just want to celebrate and worship together!" That feels like a beautiful use of social media. I'm hoping that all makes sense.
To me, these two polar opposite churches show me how there really is a balance to strike between existing in the modern world of social media while keeping ourselves humble, with the sole intention of giving glory back to God with what we post onlien. It's a tough tight rope to walk, but I believe it can be done with a little help from the Holy Spirit.
Thank you so much for sharing what I know is a deeply painful story – I've experienced church abuse myself. It leaves a unique kind of scar. Bless you, Joy. <3
I was quite surprised when a photo of me showed up speaking to an Associate Pastor after visiting a worship service. I hadn't thought of it in the way you describe here. Honestly, my first thought, "Is that how heavy I am now?" :-)
To me, it boils down to one word—which could legitimately be called a personal value—that’s totally ignored in today’s world: privacy. Like other values, its rank in importance varies from person to person (safety, freedom and comfort are other examples). If privacy is a high value for you, you are one of the few who seems to notice how blatantly it’s been stolen from us in our modern culture.
It's a fine line that requires some thought, but I believe it's one that every person using social media for an organization should consider. For example, I work with refugees. I have TONS of great photos of refugees smiling and embracing, etc, but I don't use them because it feels exploitive. It feels icky. Also with Afghan women at least as well as some Iraqis, the women don't want their images on social media at all. That's their prerogative and I respect their choices. If I do use an identifiable photo, I get permission first. So our social media accounts are boring and not updated very often and include a lot of pictures of food, as well as a lot of pictures where you can't see anyone's face. This may be part of why we're so woefully underfunded, but ultimately my refugee friends are more important.
I love your approach to this. Better to have a "boring" account than exploit vulnerable people. You're treating them as real people with agency, not mascots to further your cause and bring in fundraising...!
Your commitment to respecting the wishes and privacy of the refugees you work with is truly commendable. Keep up the important work you’re doing.
I work with refugees as well - for the safety of the populations we work with, we would never post identifiable pictures of our friends on social media! That’s such a security risk. And not to mention, dishonoring to their privacy.
I’m also thinking about the families who have experienced or are experiencing domestic violence. Or other violence (like stalking). Can you imagine what could happen if a perpetrator located his/her victim on church social media?
Are churches not required to have signed media releases?
It's time to start having these conversations. It's like everyone started copying each other and I just can't help but wonder if anyone has paused long enough to consider the pitfalls of using worship as content? Also, why are churches calling it an experience instead of a service? I had never been at a church like that until recently, and we left for many reasons. But changing service to experience never sat right with me. Thanks for being bold in your writing and shining a light on these issues!
Thank you! You're right -- the shift to calling it an "experience" rather than worship is significant. The focus changes from sacred time with God, with him as the audience to our worship... to some kind of entertainment program, with us as the audience and other people performing for us. Yuck.
This won’t surprise you: I always felt weird when I saw the photographer in church. I was instantly taken out of worship and felt self conscious about how I worshipped—hands up? Hands down? Eyes closed or open? Please don’t take my picture! She tried to be unobtrusive, walking around the edges, but she had a camera in a sacred space. I hated it.
I can imagine! For some reason I never paid much attention, but I would absolutely have had the same thoughts as you if so 😂😅
Another reason to value home church.
idk abt that idea, it can be abused in some way for lack of accountability unless we seek God wholeheartedly and still meditate day and night. it was alsoa written that we shall not neglect fellowship with other believer as irom sharpens iron.
Thank you for sharing.
In the past I've heard people dismiss the idea of "home church," but since our experience I can certainly see the appeal in it! There's likely a very different set of priorities.
Our Web and social media teams use photos and video of worship - the video is streamed inside the building and on YouTube, Instagram, etc. Our tabernacle is somewhat large, and there is a fire aisle about 1/4 of the way back. If you sit in front of the fire aisle, or come down to the altar area, it's likely you will be photographed. If you sit farther back, getting photographed is unlikely. There are many reasons people sit in front of the fire aisle and almost certainly one of them is to be seen (and that's not entirely negative. Our pastor has told the staff that he appreciates seeing us in worship).
I had not considered your concerns. You have given me a lot to consider. I hope we are not guilty of using the people whose images we capture until they are no longer useful. But I am not part of the team that plans the services, or the social media or Web content.
Yes, there are so many things to consider ... it's an area where I think churches often have followed the culture without realizing these practices could "disciple" people in the wrong direction. Jesus said the hypocrites did all their works of piety "to be seen by others," and we can all benefit from asking whether our worship is veering in that direction (personally or corporately).
im curious what happened when you said this to the “management” people of the church?
did they immediately dismissed your reminder or suggestion to them abt the photos?
I suppose I didn't make it clear in my post, but I haven't brought this concern directly to my former church. When the photo was initially posted, I didn't think through all the issues at all, so I never mentioned it then. Now we are no longer in the same church or even the same state, and I wouldn't attempt communication with the pastors after the abuse we experienced. I do hope others can be helped by all of this, however!
I think you make a good point about the churches using content to make church look appealing rather than share the Gospel. As a relatively new believer it seems a little strange as there are so many lost people out there, and perhaps it would be a better 'church growth' strategy to go out and share the Gospel as Jesus told us to.
Yes! You have a great perspective on this. And I think much of the problem is that we’ve made “church growth” the goal. People become a means to that end. Jesus never tried to “grow” his following. He sought genuine relationships.
"It wasn’t about sharing the gospel, it was about making sure people heard the gospel in our church." So much to think about here. Thank you for sharing your experience, Joy.
I love that you have opened up conversation with this topic. I left a church that was extremely concerned with its image and brand, and I was part of the photography team, which always put me in a position of having to discern what to frame and capture, and for what purpose. Our photography team leader and I shared a similar belief (I don't think this was necessarily promoted by the church – it was just our personal feelings on the matter) that we would photograph the backs of people's heads, hands raised, as silhouettes against the light of the stage, but I didn't photograph people's faces because it felt intrusive. "Worship is intimate and personal" was sort of our motto. For all of the things my old church did wrong (and there was a lot), I am proud that those of us who personally served on the photography team did our best to not exploit individuals for the personal gain of the church's brand. That said, this church still did the exact same thing that you have described in sacrificing individuals on the altar of their brand and image, and I have absolutely no doubt that the photography/film/social media elements were a part of that wider picture.
On the flip side, the church I began attending after leaving this larger, flashy church, is genuinely lead by some of the most humble people I have ever met. They asked me if I would come in for a single weekend to take some photos simply so they had some imagery to put on their website for those who might be researching the church and want to get an idea for the look and feel of the place. We discussed announcing to the whole congregation, over several weeks, that there would be a photographer in on a specific Sunday so that they had autonomy over whether they were photographed. On a regular basis, they only photograph a service if it's a baptism or a baby dedication, and it's posted from a place of genuine joy and celebration, like "We are so overjoyed at what Jesus is doing in x's life and we just want to celebrate and worship together!" That feels like a beautiful use of social media. I'm hoping that all makes sense.
To me, these two polar opposite churches show me how there really is a balance to strike between existing in the modern world of social media while keeping ourselves humble, with the sole intention of giving glory back to God with what we post onlien. It's a tough tight rope to walk, but I believe it can be done with a little help from the Holy Spirit.
Thank you so much for sharing what I know is a deeply painful story – I've experienced church abuse myself. It leaves a unique kind of scar. Bless you, Joy. <3
I was quite surprised when a photo of me showed up speaking to an Associate Pastor after visiting a worship service. I hadn't thought of it in the way you describe here. Honestly, my first thought, "Is that how heavy I am now?" :-)
To me, it boils down to one word—which could legitimately be called a personal value—that’s totally ignored in today’s world: privacy. Like other values, its rank in importance varies from person to person (safety, freedom and comfort are other examples). If privacy is a high value for you, you are one of the few who seems to notice how blatantly it’s been stolen from us in our modern culture.