The Real David Platt has made a much larger impact than it would appear. Despite obscure distribution, the documentary is reaching a wide reach. Evidently, David Platt’s Radical rehash was part of a broader media campaign to deflect bad publicity with good. And a liberal media outlet would expose that David Platt and company were working to undercut the documentary.
Baptist News Global is a liberal with pro-abortion and pro-gay sex drug funding proponents writing articles, so naturally, David Platt thought they would be a safe outlet for a softball interview. But instead, a stunning act of journalism occurred. Maina Mwaura wrote an article titled, “Understanding the David Platt story.”
Two weeks ago, I received a press release from a PR firm inquiring about my interest in interviewing pastor and New York Times bestselling author David Platt. The request struck me as unusual, as Platt typically only grants interviews coinciding with new book releases, which is not now.
Nevertheless, given his recent op-ed on lostness and my own spiritual interest in evangelism, I was intrigued by the opportunity to engage with someone who rarely gives interviews. What neither the PR representative nor Platt disclosed was the impending release of a documentary about Platt — information that would have significantly influenced my approach to the interview.
The truth only emerged when I contacted the PR firm seeking clarity on what I initially dismissed as more allegations from disgruntled members. The firm’s admission that they knew about the documentary’s planned release revealed a calculated strategy to paint Platt in a positive light before its release. When I subsequently requested a follow-up interview with Platt to address these revelations, he was suddenly unavailable — a stark contrast to his earlier accessibility.
So, according to Mwaura, David Platt suddenly became uninterested in doing an interview that he asked for once the documentary was established to be known about. Accordingly, Platt wanted a softball interview with a softminded media member, but that’s not what they got. Ironically, this could have been a softball interview to rehab David Platt from the documentary.
What has emerged at McLean Bible Church is one of the most curious examples of the intersection of denominational and nondenominational alliances combined with the perils of a rapid rise to leadership.
This is a story that keeps getting bigger, not smaller.
After giving an overview of David Platt’s career, ending with the allegations of the documentary, Mwaura writes that this is a big story, giving credence to the church members on a platform that otherwise would not.
Until recently, I maintained a cordial relationship with Platt, even praising his leadership abilities in navigating the complex landscape of evangelical culture during our last conversation. The conspicuous absence of any mention of the pending documentary during our interview, coupled with its timing, now raises serious ethical concerns.
Had I known about these circumstances, my questions would have focused on the documentary’s allegations and the church’s denominational affiliations.
In religious leadership, as in journalism, character and transparency form the bedrock of credibility. While I don’t subscribe to every claim presented in the documentary, the pattern of behavior it reveals raises legitimate questions that demand serious consideration.
Our character ultimately defines us, and the evidence presented suggests a troubling disconnect between public persona and private conduct.
One of my journalism professors taught us this truth: When a story fails to reflect key points or when you’ve been given misleading information, the only ethical response is to own it and set the record straight.
Mwaura concludes by insulating that David Platt is a phony, and buries the interview they had in favor of this story instead. Ouchtown, population David Platt. David Platt was looking for positive press and instead got blasted by his own side. You love to see that.
Powered by RedCircle
