Re: Scn's Dept 20: a memoir by RVY - Pt 3 (Reporter TRs)
[01 Sep 1997] of the "Reporter TRs" drills is specifically "no answer." This is where you avoid the question and divert it when the question is too hot or too difficult.

Main Index A.R.S. Web Summary Ex-Scientologists Speak

From: (Robert Vaughn Young)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scn's Dept 20: a memoir by RVY - Pt 3 (Reporter TRs)
Date: 1 Sep 1997 16:43:09 GMT
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
Lines: 178
Message-ID: <5uerat$9nd$>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Chris Schafmeister ( wrote:
: This is freakin' fascinating Robert,
: how do you think these sorts of Training Routines, "TRs",
: would work against someone who knows them and knows what to expect?

Then the TRs are basically useless. They do give the PR the experience in
knowing how to reply, not unlike a political candidate who - after months
of interviews on the campaign trail - comes to know how to reply. It is
then up to the journalist/voter to see that they are getting canned
replies and punch through it.

If you want to see someone who's "TRs" went out the bottom, watch Lisa
Goodman on that MTV segment when Kurt Louder asked her about Xenu.* Her,
"I don't know what you are talking about" clearly sent her back to drill
that question about 300 times! (LOL)

: It seems to me that if I was a reporter and
: I knew that a Scientologist that I was interviewing
: might try to "cave me in" that it wouldn't be effective.

No, it is not.

: Would you be able to come up with a few guidelines
: on how a reporter might "handle" "Reporter TRs"?

That was one of the points of the article I wrote for QUILL that some
people have webbed, to alert the media that this is done. As I said, it is
really not much different than politicos except that Scn PRs _really_
train in it. Look at Heber Jentzsch's delivery. The man has been doing TRs
for so long he can't do anything else.

And you know where they get this? A major source is the LRH interview
film, the one by Tony Hitchman, which has to be one of the worst and the
corniest interviews ever made of anyone. The fact that Hubbard approved
it and that it is sold in Scientology bookstores and given to libraries
is difficult to believe. I strongly urge journalists to watch it! Watch
these "TRs" of L. Ron Hubbard as he gives these little disarming chuckles
and these _horrible_ answers. (And don't think for a minute the interview
was spontaneous. It wasn't. It was completely canned, which makes it even

Compere it to the interview on the Apollo, the one where LRH is asked if
he ever thinks he's crazy. LRH gives his little (the same one as in the
Hitchman interview) chuckle that is one of the worst acting jobs you'll
see and then says, "Oh, yes, because the only man who thinks he is sane is
the insane man," or some such quote. There is a good reason why TV have
pulled this part up: because the man is completely faking it to the point
that you believe he might really _be_ insane.

And this is "source" for "Reporter TRs," the one who is studied! That's
where Heber gets his little disarming chuckle! From LRH!

The PRs also study the few times LRH responed in print. One was some
telexed answers he sent to the _Sun_ newspaper in the UK. Another is a
reply to a UK magazine article written by William Burroughs which is
classic "no answer."

Which reminds me: I failed to mention that one of the "Reporter TRs"
drills is specifically "no answer." This is where you avoid the question
and divert it when the question is too hot or too difficult. Some examples
from LRH are found in HCOPL 21 Nov 72 PR Series 18, "How To Handle Black
Propaganda." This policy has two purposes: to teach the PR how to deal
with "enemy" questions and also (when you link it up to the "Targets,
Defense" policy of doing what the "enemy" does but only better) teaches
how to DO "black PR." Here's an example from L. Ron Hubbard of how to move
from the subject:

---start LRH quote:

Don't stay on the same subject that you are being attacked on.

An example of speaking up without denying and thus confirming might be:

STATEMENT: "I read your company went broke last month."

REBUTTAL: "My God. You're telling me! If we hadn't got out of that
contract we really would have gone broke. There was a hell of a row in the
board room. But McLinty won. Scotch to the core. He said, 'I won't sign
it' Like to have tore the president's head off. Hell of a row. Seems like
we got 80 million buried somewhere and McLinty is in charge of it and he
won't _move an inch_ on it."

The Interrogator's conclusion is you're not broke. He's got data. The
vacuum is filled with a story of board rows and 80 million mysterious

--end LRH quote.

See how it works?

Here's another example. The person asks if you are hippis and is coaxed to
say who said that, a local minister. The suggested LRH reply, "(Sob.)
(Kleenex) What an awful thing to say. Just because we found him dead drunk
and took him home to sleep it off and he said if we ever told he'd say
we're hippies."

Here's another, where the dock master's son said some people (presumbedly
Scientologists) stole some rowbots. The suggested LRH rebuttal, "Oh, him.
Gets things wrong. _Our_ rowboat was stolen! With all the gear in it. We
were out fishing and . . . say, you don't suppose HE stole it do ou? Did
you ever hear of him stealing anything? Has he got a record?" Hubbard then
adds, "Well this doc master's son will now 'have a record in the stater's

Is it sounding familiar?

These are all part of seven steps that Hubbard gives on handling the
"enemy" PR line. Here's #6:

"6. Use the knowledge of source to impede or destroy
the source of Black Propaganda by non-criminal means."

Get that? Should we repeat what this "founder of a religion" says the PRs
should be trained to do?

The #6 rule is repeated later as merely, "6. Impede or destroy."

Here's another from the man Scientology says is "the greatest friend
mankind has ever had." L. Ron Hubbard said, "Statements one makes can be
curved. 'She had a birthday party' becomes 'The delinquents in her circle
gathered yesterday for a sex orgy and pretended to the police it was a
birthday party. No one was jailed.'"

Anyone seen anything like this on ARS? (laughing)

: It might be useful to have up on the web where
: reporters doing pre-interview research could find it.

The above cited policy is one of the best. Every reporter - every person
who wants to know how Scientology "PR" works - should study it, alongside
"Targets, Defense," where LRH says to do what the "enemy" does, only

As far as "Reporter TRs," the best way to know them is to read and watch
an LRH inteview, believe it or not. Watch or read the man who is "source"
for these PRs and how Scientology handles any criticism.

Here's the start of an antidote to these methods, if someone ever webbed
them or gave them to the media:

1. RVY QUILL article
2. LRH HCOPL "Targets, Defense"
3. LRH HCOPL "How to handle Black Propaganda"
4. LRH's answer to the Sun (if someone ever found them)
5. LRH filmed interviews (or sound bits - transcripts of him are weak)

There's also some great tidbits being posted by RonIsXenu such as that
little ODC checklist on finding a critic's crimes and who can get him
fired etc. That hooks back into the cited HCOPL.

Hey, who says I don't recommend Hubbard as "source" material for

Robert Vaughn Young

* I want to thank RTC President McShane for testifying in a federal court
- with a straight face - that none of that OT III Xenu body thetan stuff
was _ever_ secret.

: (Robert Vaughn Young) writes:

: >
: >Scientology's Dept. 20:: a memoir
: >Part 3 - Reporter TRs
: >by Robert Vaughn Young
: >
: >The ability to throw and give a press conference was usually the last part
: >of the training that we gave to Scientology PRs and the final drilling for
: >it was what was called "Reporter TRs."

: [text deleted]
: --
: Christian E.A.F. Schafmeister Biophysics graduate student
: University of California, San Francisco
: "We went to the Moon. It wasn't a miracle. We just decided to go." -Apollo13