- Home
- About
- FAQ
- Law & Politics
- Media
- Events
- Press Information
- Christians Take Over Interfaith Army Chapel in Combat Zone
- Press Kit
- 9/11: 'Never Forget' Must Include All Victims
- Atheists Advocate Separation of Church and State at DNC
- Congressman Pete Stark to Speak at 2013 National Convention
- American Atheists Announces 50th Anniversary Logo Design Contest
- American Atheists Announces Harassment Policy for Conventions and Conferences
- American Atheists Jubilant Over Latest Religion Report
- American Atheists Removes Religious Billboards from Charlotte
- Former Pastor Now American Atheists Public Relations Director
- Former Pastor Teresa MacBain New Public Relations Director
- ITALIAN JUDGE LUIGI TOSTI ACQUITTED!
- American Atheists to Protest Bradford County, FL Decalogue on May 19
- Join
- Shop
Supporting Civil Rights for Atheists and the Separation of Church and State
12
Jan
2011
Response to Massimo's Critique
Massimo Pigliucci posted some critical comments on his blog Rationally Speaking, posted here. Ed Buckner responded here, but I wanted to take some time to address his issues personally. My answers follow. ------------------------------------- I want to start this article by thanking Massimo for his civil tone and frank honesty. The billboard about which he writes has generated a substantial amount of discussion, and many of its detractors have been anything but civil, instead devolving into ad hominem and personal attacks against American Atheists or me. It is my hope that the entire movement can learn how to attack ideas without attacking people from Massimo. I also want to state categorically that Massimo is still counted as one of my friends, a friend of the organization (of which he is a Life Member), and a serious player in the movement. As we all know, atheists don’t always agree, and we will never progress without acceptance of our own diversity. I have learned over the past three months (as American Atheists’ new President) that it is an unhealthy and wasteful use of my time to debate online. I write this reply for Massimo, but I hope all viewers will understand that I cannot get into a back-and-forth on this. First and foremost, yes, all religions are scams. I find it difficult to grasp that there is really any disagreement here, since it is so blatant. They promise an afterlife (which we all know doesn’t exist) and further promise that adherence to some set of rules, which include giving money or power to the preaching church, will somehow improve that afterlife, which is of course a false promise. While some groups claim to be ‘nontheistic religions’, we specify on our web site that these groups are not included in this assertion. Theistic religions are all scams. It makes no difference if the purveyors know they are peddling falsehood – it’s still happening, but some scams are multi-leveled. For example, homeopathy is a scam, always, whether the so-called practitioner believes in it or not. Homeopathic practitioners are either liars or victims, and the same goes with clergy, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that promises are being made and never kept, and the buyers/believers are the victims. But the billboard doesn’t go that far. It challenges people to consider whether THEY know they’re all scams, without making the global statement itself. The implication here is “we know it, and we dare you to admit you do, too,” and frankly, I think Massimo missed the mark here on what it says and the meaning it conveys. He is inferring what is not implied. Massimo’s second and third assertions are really both the same – that this is just an overall bad strategy from multiple angles. I respectfully challenge this as complete supposition and assumption, unsupported by any facts. The good news is I do have facts. I have the fact that our membership is up 20% since November. I have the fact that we’ve seen a surge in purchases and donations. I have a nearly sold-out regional convention – in Alabama. I have more new members in the local Alabama group than they’ve gotten in the past 9 months combined. I have literally hundreds of emails to American Atheists from people who our message has reached, from all over the world, who truly appreciate our efforts. So, quite frankly, the assertion that we are “driving people into the closet” is simply an assumption Massimo uses to support his conclusion that the strategy is faulty. That’s not factual. We are succeeding quite well. But American Atheists is not only about itself, we are about the whole movement. The biggest, A-number-one problem in this whole movement is (say it with me now) awareness - the closeted or unconnected atheist’s ignorance of organized atheism. Please don’t make the mistake that we have eliminated this major issue! This is our immediate need, and our common target market, and the problem cannot be solved without using the press. Press coverage of a billboard substantially increases the value proposition and must be considered when weighing its success. I have reports or mentions on O’Reilly, Colbert, Olbermann, and every major TV news outlet in Alabama as well as many in other states, all from this SCAMS billboard. If we include the first “You KNOW it’s a Myth” billboard, we can add every major news network several times over, including ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Colbert (again), Saturday Night Live, and national news in 6 other countries. This amounts to over $10M in total coverage, much of which hits our direct market, NOT including web logs and discussion boards ($millions more), all from two billboards! All of this raises awareness, and benefits the whole movement. We won’t get that kind of play with the ‘nicey-nicey’ billboards. We will get it by pushing the envelope of political correctness by challenging the assertion that religion deserves respect, and that religious practice is anything but an exercise in self-delusion. Let’s not get out of hand when we talk about our message. Massimo makes it sound like our motto is ‘American Atheists: F@ck your God’. So please take a moment to reflect. Are we really being THAT offensive? No. We said religion is a scam, and the parishioners are its victims. That’s the message that got out. No profanity. No hate. No insults. Not negative, not raunchy, not even angry. I’m sorry; I cannot believe that our message drove anyone away that wasn’t already leaving. So Massimo’s assertion that this is bad PR is simply wrong. We have all the numbers and active feedback we need to back it up – people do, in fact, know they’re all scams. He doesn’t like our campaign – but he is not the target market! The target markets are the closeted atheists and the press, with whom the billboards are home-runs, thank you very much. This is not to say that Massimo’s comments have gone unheard. We can all see the nuances that separate us on a philosophical level, and we will take this into account as we continue forward. However, the billboards and other ad campaigns will continue. American Atheists is never going to shy away from telling the blunt and honest truth about the greatest scam in history: religion. Disagree if you wish, Massimo, that’s OK (remember, our principle difference here is “all” vs. “some” religions are scams). The next time we get together we’ll talk about the 99% of things on which we DO agree. First round is on me. To everyone else, I urge you to donate your money and time to the movement, and get the organizations with which you most identify to start/ramp up their own ad campaigns. This movement is diverse, and we will never all agree on approach. Instead, we should delight in this diversity, and make it clear to newcomers that atheism has many facets and faces, many angles and attitudes. We are one movement with the same goal, but if we are to succeed (and we will), we must look outward for a fight. I’ll be on the front lines. Sincerely, David Silverman President American Atheists, Inc Voice: 732.648.9333 FAX 908.737.1203
Popular content
- Uhl Challenge (3,897)
- Other Issues (3,892)
- American Atheists Credit Card (3,885)
- Atheist Director Wins Creche Case (3,883)
- 879 Florida 2012 Presidential Debate Billboard (3,881)
Pages
Popular Today
- American Atheists Board Member Noel Scott has died (1)
- Millions of taxpayer dollars used to convert soldiers and their children to Christianity (1)
- "Rock Beyond Belief" Festival At Fort Bragg CANCELED (1)
- American Atheists launch 'Go Godless Instead' Billboards in Texas (1)
- The LEDGE - premiered at our convention in Des Moines, now has an on-line sneak-peek (1)
Pages
Get our Website Updates!
Do you want the latest AA news as soon as it happens?
Sign up using the link below and be the first in the know!
American Atheists Visa
Apply for the American Atheists Visa Card
and show your support with every purchase you make!






Comments
Dave, you are absolutely right, both billboards were justified. I am done being nice to believers. If a believer says something ridiculous, they now get challenged by me. Believers no longer get away with: God bless you, I will pray for you, or everything happens for a reason, etc. If you say something stupid to me, you will be challenged. I wish someone would have been as forthcoming with me or that I would have seen an in your face billboard, then I would have become an atheist much sooner. Times are changing. If you want to spout silly beliefs, then be prepared to back it up.
Ah, the Great Tone Debate occurs again. My personal opinion is that there is some ideal mix of the confrontational-viral-insultive approach and the kid-gloves approach. Second, the tone of the atheist movement needs to be.consistent with our essential message: critical thinking is superior to the crass tribalism of religion and has the potential to unite humanity. Third, the appropriateness of a marketing campaign is measured not by opinions but by the whole set of observed results, just like in business. When I say the whole set of results, I mean the benefits minus the costs. For example, the animal-rights organization PETA is famous for outlandish high-publicity protests that often require nudity of their members. This approach has left them with a very vibrant organization on the one hand, but marginalization of their message on the other. Their path led them to be both internally strong and externally ineffective (e.g. little legislative or popular support). The gay rights movement, on the other hand, was perfect pitch. They branded themselves in the media as friendly and funny, contradicting the conservative message of threat and doom. They are seeing real wins in society and law. So we should start by asking, where do we want to be in the future and what message will result in us getting there?7
We have found that mixing it up is, indeed, the way to go. Every method works for a specific demographic. One thing you'll notice in the "tone debate" is that none of the confrontation atheists are asking their non-confrontation counterparts to be quiet or to STFU. We encourage all methods to be used and encourage all of our friends to continue to do what they are doing.
Those last 2 words are synonyms.
As P. T. Barnum said "any publicity is good publicity." If you can get people talking about you, good or bad, then at least they know you're there. Obscurity is more lethal than infamy. Because of the current religious climate, atheism is almost necessarily confrontational. Granted, I bet you're attracting a great many more anti-theists with such strategies.
That being said, I've got to point out something. Whatever was "intended" by the billboard doesn't matter to the person seeing it. What matters in their mind is how they interpret the message.
We understand that perception of the billboard plays into it just as much as intent. And that perception of the billboard is what generated the press. If everyone knew the intent it wouldn't have generated as much hoopla.
I find it strange that so many of our fellow atheists who are speaking out about this didn't even bother to contact us and discuss it. This is especially disheartening when it comes to bloggers, but I guess that's the difference between opinions and actual news pieces.
Massimo may fear a theist backlash. Many believers reinforce their belief through persecution. Perhaps Massimo feels that theists will feel persecuted as a result of the billboard. Perhaps Massimo has made the same mistake as to who the targets of the billboard were as many others have. The minds of believers will not be changed by such a billboard but those who already are skeptical may find the strength to abandon their facade. Knowing there are others who share their skepticism may help them progress towards atheism.
Yes, Massimo and PZ Myers both made the mistake that the billboard said religious people or leaders are scams and that is not what we said. The billboard is clear that we are talking about the religions themselves. That's why we have pictures of temples and not pictures of clergy or parishioners/congregants.
We know there are sincere believers out there that don't think they're scamming people out of money or that they are being scammed. We get that. But that does not change the fact that the religions themselves are scams. Just because a psychic honestly believes she is a psychic does not change the fact that psychic powers are a scam.
Whereas I agree that many religious people and their leaders sincerely believe what they are doing is not scamming, there are others who know exactly what they are doing... going for the dollar. I believe the very rich evangelists know exactly the nature of their business... snake oil.
Actually in the utmost definition, the individuals responsible for the scriptures are the original scammers.
It does when people say, "Saw your billboard and loved it, so I became a member!"
People often let us know why they are joining and many tell us their story about de-conversion and the horrors of being in the closet of being harassed and discriminated against. We are well aware of the difference between correlation and causation and would not have posted the list if we did not KNOW it was causation.
Large donations were made specifically because of the billboards.
you're defence regarding whether the strategy is effective or not uses an argument very commonly used by theists. That is that correlation does not imply causation. Just because you have substantially added to your membership after you began the ad campaign doesn't mean the ad campaign caused it. Otherwise a very good critique in defence of a necessary campaign
wow....99% do not think that religion might not be a scam....no one has doubt...except for 1%...
I think ridicule is really all you can do....hey the Catholics are about to promote a dead club member president to Sainthood....one of the criteria have been met when a nun was cured of Parkinson's....the dead pope did it from the afterlife....
The first point of this debate seems to depend on how one defines the word "scam." Like Massimo, I think the word implies a conscious decision to defraud. Yet I think 99% of all religious people, including religious leaders, truly believe what they are saying, so in that sense religion would not be a scam.
So what would be a better word? "Fraud"? But that might carry the same implication of conscious deception that the word "scam" does (though, I think, to a lesser degree). "Unsubstantiated" would be perfectly accurate, but not very catchy.
The second point of this argument centers on the billboard's impact. We can objectively say that it has led to a lot of media appearances and increased membership. But what effect has the billboard had on how the majority of the population views atheists? Are we now more likely to be viewed as intolerant people to be avoided, or as bold people to be admired? I can imagine a survey being done, but until it occurs I don't think we can know the answer.
It might also be argued that it is less important what the (religious) majority cares and more important that we swell our ranks and increase our power as a political, if divisive, force.
Ridicule is a double-edged sword: it can cause people to emotionally and then mentally shut down or it can challenge them to look at things in a new way.
Pages