Please Delete the Recordings, YouTube & Zoom

Hi,

I want to make a point where I am going through YouTube and I am suddenly seeing many wards showing up in my feed of their sacrament services on the platform.

This means that people have not heeded the instruction from the letter dated 26 October 2023, that was sent to us, to state we are not supposed to be using YouTube. "YouTube and other services are currently being reviewed but are not approved as official tools for broadcasting Church events.".

You can stream a meeting in Zoom without using YouTube at all, and I believe that was the intended request from us, to solely use Zoom and not YouTube, and then I heard people saying that it was a guidelines and not required, and this and that and the other; lets just do as the letter states is my opinion, if the Church states that we are to use Zoom and that at present time YouTube is not approved... then we should do as we are requested right?

But let us not forget that all recordings must be deleted within 24 hours! Please see the Church Handbook of Instructions 29.7. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... e_number57 where it states "Stream recordings of ward and stake meetings should be deleted within one day after the meeting.".

I pray that we will remember these important things,

Please reply with your opinions and comments please.

Simon

Teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves.

There are many reasons why YouTube is still a better platform than zoom for serving those in need.

Whilst YouTube is not officially supported, that doesn't mean that it is actively discouraged.

Just as long as we are aware that we may get some support if we are using zoom, we certainly won't get support if using YouTube.

Hi,

I appreciate your response.

May I ask if you state those things because the way you have been doing it for a long time is in place, and you would find it rather annoying to change to Zoom?

Points of view:

1. The church has spent a ton of money on Zoom licenses for every ward.

2. If you spend that much money they have spent, would you as the church want everyone then to use it?

3. The church was very poignant in the letter word wise, by stating "not approved" as the official...

4. The subject of the letter "New Tools and Guidelines for Managing Local Broadcasts" <-- new guidelines?

5. They also spent a load of money creating a new broadcasts website to make it easier for members of the church to find their broadcasts in a unified way.

I have hundreds more... but if you look at the "guidelines" to the "new tools" letter, in a deep and meaningful way you will find just like me, even though I too do not like Zoom, is indeed guidelines for us to follow. . . or do you still disagree?

Simon

Personally, I moved to zoom long ago. Occasionally need YouTube for overflow for larger meetings.

Reasons for YouTube being preferable.

Legacy church hardware such as teradek or mevo cameras (many of which were purchased and supplied just in 2020) were setup and are optimised for sending a RMTP signal to a server. Once the church stopped it's own server, many of those users just changed a few settings and carried on via YouTube. No additional hardware needed.

From the receivers end, YouTube requires no client and can be connected to by any smart TV with little to zero knowledge.

Unfortunately a large portion of the demographic that are being served just do struggle with technology and YouTube greases the wheels to help them at their end.

Even those wards who broadcast using YouTube, still use zoom for regular meetings such as ward council etc, do it's not like the local units license is going to waste if that's what you are getting at.

Pros and cons to both sides of the discussion.

I understand and recognise your points but also see the need for local units to do what serves them best, just as the general handbook shows us in many cases, local leaders can adapt and adjust as needed.

1. RMTP was setup by your STS or other TS.

2. Zoom does not need an account or software, it can be seen via a website page like in your stake website "streaming" section (if you have one) ask me for details if you need it.

3. I am a former programmer for LDS Tech. If you use PHP here is the code to do no.2 $zoomlink = "https://app.zoom.us/wc/".$zoomid."/join ... &fromPWA=1";

In layman's terms https://app.zoom.us/wc/".$zoomid."/join ... &fromPWA=1 the ".$zoomid." is where the id of the meeting would go into!

Example: https://app.zoom.us/wc/80514694651/join ... &fromPWA=1 <--- 80514694651 is not a real zoom meeting number, just an example... that above link will get you into the zoom meeting where you only type in your name, no account, no installation of software or anything...

Does this answer all your points?

Simon

Addendum

1. There are settings in Zoom that must be changed to allow this to work properly.
For example:
The option of ( Show "Always join from browser" option when joining from join.zoom.us ) must be turned on in Zoom account settings.

2. The meeting setup must be setup by a paid license. (viewers without paid license does not affect them in anyway shape or form)

Hope this helps

Simon

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 9:03 am 1. RMTP was setup by your STS or other TS.

2. Zoom does not need an account or software, it can be seen via a website page like in your stake website "streaming" section (if you have one) ask me for details if you need it.

3. I am a former programmer for LDS Tech. If you use PHP here is the code to do no.2 $zoomlink = "https://app.zoom.us/wc/".$zoomid."/join ... &fromPWA=1";

In layman's terms https://app.zoom.us/wc/".$zoomid."/join ... &fromPWA=1 the ".$zoomid." is where the id of the meeting would go into!

Example: https://app.zoom.us/wc/80514694651/join ... &fromPWA=1 <--- 80514694651 is not a real zoom meeting number, just an example... that above link will get you into the zoom meeting where you only type in your name, no account, no installation of software or anything...

Does this answer all your points?

Simon

RTMP was the standard used by the church for many years until recently. Once the settings were saved into a device like the Mevo or Teradek, it was a simple single button push and it was streaming.

Try and ask someone who struggles with technology to connect to a zoom meeting when they don't have a PC or a smart phone. Good luck. A smart TV with youtube is much quicker and simpler.

I'm not saying that there isn't a place and obviously some advantages to zoom. I'm just stating that broadcasting by youtube is easier for the sender and the receiver.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I was saying that the TS or STS should go into the Mevo settings and set it up for Zoom.

If you don't have a PC or Smart Phone how do you stream the broadcast?

What do you think about my solution regarding no account and no software needed?

Simon

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 10:00 am I was saying that the TS or STS should go into the Mevo settings and set it up for Zoom.

If you don't have a PC or Smart Phone how do you stream the broadcast?

What do you think about my solution regarding no account and no software needed?

Simon

I'm well aware of the additional hardware and configuration needed to convert legacy equipment for zoom. It's not complicated and as long as you have someone willing to donate a laptop, it's not costly but it is an extra unnecessary link in the chain.

I'm referring to those receiving the broadcast that may be challenged by technology. Those are the ones that often need help to connect at their end.

Which is why Zoom does not need software, apps or an account to view the meeting.

This makes those challenged by technology have an easier time right?

Simon

That is only true for some devices.

It works on my apple iPad, Samsung tablet, iPhone, Samsung s21, it works for every device that has a website browser.

I tried it on safari, Firefox, chrome, if you would like to try it use my link https://app.zoom.us/wc/<put your zoom id for the meeting here>/join?from=join&fromPWA=1 create a meeting (test meeting) making sure your using the paid license account, then sign into zoom.us and sign into the account...

Click on:

1. Settings (on left side in account of paid account)
2. In Meeting (Advanced) which shows on the right of Settings
3. Scroll down or CTRL F and search for "Always join from browser"
4. Make sure the toggle is blue and to the right

Then enter your zoomid without the < > in the above link just like this <code> https://app.zoom.us/wc/1234567890/join? ... &fromPWA=1 </code> (ignore the code tags)

Then click the link... (you might also want to allow participants to join meeting prior to the meeting setup as well) so you can enter before the start of the meeting.)

Try it out and then tell me what your findings are. . .

Simon

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 10:00 am I was saying that the TS or STS should go into the Mevo settings and set it up for Zoom.

Does Zoom support having a webcast originate from a RTMP? The last anyone could fined, you had to have a computer with a Zoom client on it. On the other hand, YouTube is supported by a number of devices.

I've got both LG and Hisense smart TVs and neither of them will connect to zoom through their browsers. Even after the very fiddly task of inputting the link.

Both can connect to YouTube in seconds and if you are subscribed to the ward YouTube channel then it's served up for you front and centre.

Does it work on other devices like cell, tablets, desktops etc?

I will do further research, and come back to you on the TV issue, this I have not looked into. I look forward to the challenge.

Question can you install zoom app on those tv's?

Simon

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 8:36 am They also spent a load of money creating a new broadcasts website to make it easier for members of the church to find their broadcasts in a unified way.

That would have been great during the pandemic shutdown when we couldn't attend, but the Handbook is very clear: "Streams and virtual meetings are not meant for the convenience of those who could reasonably attend in person."

I think there's going to have to be more guidance as to how much the bishop approves who gets to watch and how much is "teach correct principles and let them guide themselves". The handbook is clear on the criteria, but silent on who decides individual cases.

I fear that on TV's in particular, those kind of devices need an app, and gets away from what we are trying to achieve which is ease of usability.

The following is where I am sourcing the following information: https://techyoulike.com/can-i-use-zoom-on-my-smart-tv/

There are a few ways we can stream to the TV... which includes using:

1. Smart TV App

2. Casting or mirroring

3. HDMI Connection (desktop, laptop, cell, tablet cable to tv)

For those few people I fear a technology specialist might have to visit the people requesting to watch Zoom on TV's and help them set it up.

This is in my belief is because TV's browsers do not have all the functionality and capability of zooming directly from the browser.

Limitations include cost of TV, capabilities of TV to have apps or even browser support, etc.

Roku has the zoom app (https://appsforsmarttv.com/zoom-on-roku-tv/)

Fire TV (https://support.zoom.com/hc/en/article? ... =KB0059594)

Alexa also has zoom

Basically in my mind it opens a huge can of worms, and maybe that is the reason my stake has been using hotspots to find out what parts of the website is being accessed, and also to find out what kinds of devices people use etc... and perhaps are we trying to help the one or two or perhaps the many? Can of worms.. but can it be done on TV? Yes...

However, can you do it on the TV without software, apps, account etc... I fear the answer is no.

Simon

russellhltn wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 10:59 am

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 8:36 am They also spent a load of money creating a new broadcasts website to make it easier for members of the church to find their broadcasts in a unified way.

That would have been great during the pandemic shutdown when we couldn't attend, but the Handbook is very clear: "Streams and virtual meetings are not meant for the convenience of those who could reasonably attend in person."

I think there's going to have to be more guidance as to how much the bishop approves who gets to watch and how much is "teach correct principles and let them guide themselves". The handbook is clear on the criteria, but silent on who decides individual cases.

What my website did:

1. Take the details of the user, like name, email, how many are watching on the device.
2. Which stake, ward and what reason they wanted to watch the broadcast (in a textarea textbox)
3. Admin area for the bishop to sign into
a) in the requests area it would show a table of name, reason to watch, YES, NO (buttons)
b) if he pressed NO the user would never get access to the page where the broadcast was streaming from
c) if he pressed YES the user would get access to the page of the broadcast
d) the social media specialist would already have added in the program of sacrament meeting (hymns, speakers etc)
e) in real time the ward and stake clerks in the report section showed them the names, and how many on each device

This way the Bishop may allow individuals to watch or not at his discretion, and he could also do it from the stage in a fast way...

Simon

russellhltn wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 10:59 am

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 8:36 am They also spent a load of money creating a new broadcasts website to make it easier for members of the church to find their broadcasts in a unified way.

That would have been great during the pandemic shutdown when we couldn't attend, but the Handbook is very clear: "Streams and virtual meetings are not meant for the convenience of those who could reasonably attend in person."

I think there's going to have to be more guidance as to how much the bishop approves who gets to watch and how much is "teach correct principles and let them guide themselves". The handbook is clear on the criteria, but silent on who decides individual cases.

I quote this again and now we take the website I built to a second level "Ministering"

I also had a section for the Deacons President, Relief Society President, Elders Quorum President, they would get a report similar to the clerks, but also allowed the user to indicate the reasons they are watching, and also if they wanted:

1. Sacrament in their home
2. A blessing
3. Welfare
4. Emergency

This brings Ministering to a whole new level, bringing zoom into Ministering and the idea was that if you are watching from home, there is a problem... as indicated above. Which is why the Bishop should discern who watches, and in an instant reporting way, have the organization of the church automatic and proactive instead of what we always do as a Church in reactive ministering. . . what a great blessing it could be... and why those who watch from home the church should somehow indicate those people to the local leaders for their discretion and decision making on what is needed for the individual or one, who is unable to attend for no fault of their own...

What do you think?

Simon

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 11:16 am What do you think?

Not having seen the website, I'm not sure. Many have tried to use their web expertise to further the work, only to run afoul of church policy and/or privacy issues.

If your website is using a church account login, or leaders adding member information, that's going to be a non-starter. (Members adding their own information is usually OK - but then how do you limit it to members of the ward? And how do you maintain that?)

Members would add the email, their first and last name, and a simple label 'please use your church account email' would solve that issue, that way leaders can link it to the person in their ward, trying to watch the ward's YouTube (at the time), on a system similar to what the church uses for this very site phpBB as you can see below above the image of Jesus... utilizing sessions and cookies, and other security measures like honeypots etc. . . and you are absolutely correct about church policy and privacy issues, which is the reason I raise the issues, is so that maybe the church technology department in Riverton, UT could take some of the ideas and build them into the system everyone uses, that would be the best and my no.1 desire would happen, if that makes sense... but without ideas being talked about and raised, how would the church know the issues, troubles, and ideas the technology people have that could be syphoned into new and better systems that would come into the future right?

What you think?

Simon

but without ideas being talked about and raised, how would the church know the issues, troubles, and ideas the technology people have that could be syphoned into new and better systems that would come into the future right?

I'm not sure that our chatter here in the Forum will generate any effects on the Church IT department and their planning. There are a few Church employees who participate in the Forum, but I am uncertain if any of them are the type of decision-makers that could act on ideas discussed here. Are you hoping that Church employees will see our thread(s) about this, read through and process the various different ideas, and then take that into their own internal decision-making procedures? Without a reliable way for our thoughts to be integrated into their process, my expectation would be that the Forum discussions would remain separated from Church IT planning.

BrianEdwards wrote: Fri Nov 24, 2023 5:56 pm

but without ideas being talked about and raised, how would the church know the issues, troubles, and ideas the technology people have that could be syphoned into new and better systems that would come into the future right?

I'm not sure that our chatter here in the Forum will generate any effects on the Church IT department and their planning. There are a few Church employees who participate in the Forum, but I am uncertain if any of them are the type of decision-makers that could act on ideas discussed here. Are you hoping that Church employees will see our thread(s) about this, read through and process the various different ideas, and then take that into their own internal decision-making procedures? Without a reliable way for our thoughts to be integrated into their process, my expectation would be that the Forum discussions would remain separated from Church IT planning.

Therefore you are saying that again the church doesn't care about what people feel, think or share in this forum right? Just like they don't care who are the people who watch zoom and therefore there is no way to reach out to such people with afflictions, worries, sickness, and so forth, and therefore how can they say that ministering means so much to the church, without any kind of monitoring system of those who are watching from home? and perhaps no reporting system to be directly shown to the ministers over those people who sign into the broadcasts site to watch the broadcasts each week?

Simon

Therefore you are saying that again the church doesn't care about what people feel, think or share in this forum right?

I'm not sure the Church has ever stated a stance on how they might internally take advantage of the Forum. They obviously support it, as it's fully included in search results from the Church webpages. But as a regular Church member, I'm just not personally aware of any structured way for our discussions here to make their way into official Church planning or discussion. The two ways I'm aware of that the Church provides for member feedback to make it into their system, is through the Feedback functionality available at the bottom of most Church webpages or inside Church apps, and also through the Priesthood leadership channels. You may feel that's insufficient, but most of the rest of us have likewise bumped up against these limitations regarding what we'd like to see implemented. One idea that some have suggested, is that when submitting Feedback, to point to the corresponding Forum thread(s) that include the discussion, so that Church employees processing the Feedback can reference those ideas shared here.

@ simph1,
While the Tech Forum is sponsored by the Church it is not an official support channel nor set up for communications with, or to, ICS mangers or decision makers. The Tech Forum is user-to-user discussion and self help. If any ICS managers or decision makers visit here there is no indication that they do so. Any forum discussion getting to the appropriate people with decision authority through some sort of monitoring does not exist.

The Tech Forum does on occasion have Church ICS employees visit and provide valuable information and help. Most of those ICS employees can be identified by the Church Employee title and employee badge below their user name. A good portion of their posts, however, are done as regular forum users under the auspices of their Church callings, like you and me.

The official means of submitting feedback is as BrianEdwards mentioned. Additionally there is the Leader and Clerk Resources (LCR) > Help > Contact Us link to servicenow for those with the appropriate calling access to create a support ticket.

jdlessley wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2023 11:05 pm @ simph1,
While the Tech Forum is sponsored by the Church it is not an official support channel nor set up for communications with, or to, ICS mangers or decision makers. The Tech Forum is user-to-user discussion and self help. If any ICS managers or decision makers visit here there is no indication that they do so. Any forum discussion getting to the appropriate people with decision authority through some sort of monitoring does not exist.

The Tech Forum does on occasion have Church ICS employees visit and provide valuable information and help. Most of those ICS employees can be identified by the Church Employee title and employee badge below their user name. A good portion of their posts, however, are done as regular forum users under the auspices of their Church callings, like you and me.

The official means of submitting feedback is as BrianEdwards mentioned. Additionally there is the Leader and Clerk Resources (LCR) > Help > Contact Us link to servicenow for those with the appropriate calling access to create a support ticket.

Let us therefore theorize that you have a website, you have a subdomain created, then you fail to utilize the many thousands of technologists around the world. To utilize their ideas and thoughts through communication forum you setup as the church leadership. Doesn't it sound a bit strange and weird they would do such a thing, and then not utilize it for the further advancement of the church and its technology?

Where it seems to me that there is a big pushback from many in the church against technology, and you mention in any ward that one day there will be usb-c connectors on every pew, and that books and the library will one day disappear for replacement by e-books, and touch screens in each classroom and the tensions in the room rise to boiling point, as they look and respond to you in absolute terror at that thought?

Getting back onto subject, all I am saying is that if you create a meeting, inside of zoom if you have the credentials, you can delete the recordings, inside YouTube you can delete the recordings, and all you have to do as the TS is go into both if you use both, or one or other, and simply delete the actual recordings within 24 hours which is a mandatory policy set by the church in the hand book of instructions.

Simon

BrianEdwards wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:49 pm

Therefore you are saying that again the church doesn't care about what people feel, think or share in this forum right?

I'm not sure the Church has ever stated a stance on how they might internally take advantage of the Forum. They obviously support it, as it's fully included in search results from the Church webpages. But as a regular Church member, I'm just not personally aware of any structured way for our discussions here to make their way into official Church planning or discussion. The two ways I'm aware of that the Church provides for member feedback to make it into their system, is through the Feedback functionality available at the bottom of most Church webpages or inside Church apps, and also through the Priesthood leadership channels. You may feel that's insufficient, but most of the rest of us have likewise bumped up against these limitations regarding what we'd like to see implemented. One idea that some have suggested, is that when submitting Feedback, to point to the corresponding Forum thread(s) that include the discussion, so that Church employees processing the Feedback can reference those ideas shared here.

Sometimes I wish Hinckley was still with us, the point you make would not even be an issue. He loved technology and if I am correct was the person who started the ball moving? It is insufficient, and church employees who build and make systems for the church, leaders and so forth should be involved at least a hour a day in my opinion, to get a feel of what people are saying, reporting, and increase communications between those called as TS, and other callings like when I was a programming missionary, that would then bring to pass greater and more meaningful systems built to benefit the members of the church more closely to what they need and desire from the ICS. It is a tool that is sadly being missed and ignored as many are saying in this forum and those around me in various stakes I belonged to over time, that it seem's we are sadly missing great opportunities to help the Lord our God in the work of technology.

Simon

jdlessley wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2023 11:05 pm @ simph1,
While the Tech Forum is sponsored by the Church it is not an official support channel nor set up for communications with, or to, ICS mangers or decision makers. The Tech Forum is user-to-user discussion and self help. If any ICS managers or decision makers visit here there is no indication that they do so. Any forum discussion getting to the appropriate people with decision authority through some sort of monitoring does not exist.

The Tech Forum does on occasion have Church ICS employees visit and provide valuable information and help. Most of those ICS employees can be identified by the Church Employee title and employee badge below their user name. A good portion of their posts, however, are done as regular forum users under the auspices of their Church callings, like you and me.

The official means of submitting feedback is as BrianEdwards mentioned. Additionally there is the Leader and Clerk Resources (LCR) > Help > Contact Us link to servicenow for those with the appropriate calling access to create a support ticket.

I never disagreed, just saying it is a strange situation where you have an entire forum of technologists and ideas flowing back and forth, and yet when they are not even looking at this forum, perhaps they are missing out on a great opportunity to learn, grow and see what people's ideas are, and also to see what we need as a membership of the church perhaps?

I hope that clears it up.

Simon

From their perspective, they need to keep things as simple and practical as possible. Lots of techs, geeks, nerds, engineers, and what not out there who each have their own ideas on how something should be built or run, but there are even more people out there who need things as simple and easy as possible, without all the bells and whistles.

Wattsuk wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 10:16 am

simph1 wrote: Wed Nov 22, 2023 10:00 am I was saying that the TS or STS should go into the Mevo settings and set it up for Zoom.

If you don't have a PC or Smart Phone how do you stream the broadcast?

What do you think about my solution regarding no account and no software needed?

Simon

I'm well aware of the additional hardware and configuration needed to convert legacy equipment for zoom. It's not complicated and as long as you have someone willing to donate a laptop, it's not costly but it is an extra unnecessary link in the chain.

I'm referring to those receiving the broadcast that may be challenged by technology. Those are the ones that often need help to connect at their end.

Yes, members can view YouTube on a lot more devices (e.g., most smart TVs, streaming boxes, etc). Zoom works only if members have a computer or smart phone that can run the app and they can get it installed. We had our stake conference this last weekend and spent a great deal of time trying to play "tech support" with home bound members wondering why they couldn't view stake conference on YouTube like they did in the past. ("Teaching old dogs new tricks.") I have requested that our stake building internet connection be upgraded (i.e., more upload bandwidth) so we can support both Zoom and YouTube streams in the future. Add me to the "don't fix what ain't broken" crowd.

You can stream from zoom to YouTube with a couple of clicks and won't require any extra bandwidth as it is redirected from the zoom servers to the YouTube servers. We use it for overflow. It's a native feature of Zoom.

Good luck.

Don’t forget that zoom has a piece of code that is a link where the user doesn’t need an app, software or account. It has to be setup in the zoom.us account of a paid zoom license and then a link made with the meeting number and it allows them to click the link, type in a name and enter meeting from a browser page that zoom setup.

We broadcast via Zoom, and livestream from Zoom to YouTube. The question that has come up a few times is: "Since YouTube records, how long are we allowed to keep the YouTube recording? "

MikeStucki wrote: Mon Oct 05, 2026 5:31 pm The question that has come up a few times is: "Since YouTube records, how long are we allowed to keep the YouTube recording? "

General Handbook, 29.7: "Stream recordings of ward and stake meetings should be deleted within one day after the meeting."

MikeStucki wrote: Mon Oct 05, 2026 5:31 pm The question that has come up a few times is: "Since YouTube records, how long are we allowed to keep the YouTube recording? "

General Handbook 29.7: "Stream recordings of ward and stake meetings should be deleted within one day after the meeting."

We delete them the same day as soon as the next meeting is scheduled in YouTube.