Peoples Temple in Print

The Role of Print Media in Shaping the Peoples Temple Narrative prior to November 18th, 1978

[Editor’s Note: Connor Rustin wrote this paper for Prof. Alexandra Prince’s class on Peoples Temple and Jonestown at Skidmore College in the Spring of 2025.]

Introduction

The public perceptions of Peoples Temple, Jim Jones, and Jonestown, have always been shaped by the media produced about them – regardless of whether this media portrays them in a positive or a negative light. It would be near impossible to argue that, in the present day, the name Peoples Temple doesn’t carry with it a certain negative connotation. In contemporary popular media, the members of Peoples Temple are commonly portrayed as being brainwashed, with even their deaths at the hands of cyanide-laced Flavor Aid becoming synonymous with a phrase referring to the act of being gullible. They are labeled a cult, and this is where non-critical examinations of Peoples Temple frequently end.

While it’s certainly true that Jim Jones and the members of Peoples Temple have always had their critics, taking a closer look at some examples of external print media produced about the group before the events of November 18, 1978 complicates the commonly held narrative. While there are a multitude of articles which raise allegations of abuse and corruption towards the practices of Peoples Temple, there are equal if not more articles which exalt their progressive ideology and campaigns for social justice, outreach, and integration. Some of their most ardent supporters were members of government, giving credence to their high social standing prior to the tragedy. It appears as though their explicitly negative reputation was not acquired until the occurrence of the mass deaths, which raises several questions. How does looking at representations of Peoples Temple, Jim Jones, and Jonestown prior to the day that 918 people lost their lives alter the way we tend to think about the overall narrative and progression of Peoples Temple?

Though it will never be possible to paint a picture that completely and accurately describes the complexities of the internal and external narratives of the group, by analyzing a selection of news articles and print media produced about Peoples Temple and Jim Jones in conjunction with their surrounding historical context, this essay seeks to examine the role of the external media in shaping both the public perception and story of Peoples Temple prior to November 18, 1978. Who and what shaped public awareness of Peoples Temple, Jim Jones, and Jonestown? How did their reputation evolve over time? Did the media potentially influence or spur the tragedies that would later occur – and if so, how?

Positive Media Reception

Though one may initially believe that public perception of Jim Jones and Peoples Temple shifted from being strictly positive to strictly negative gradually, this assumption could not be further from the truth. Though articles were certainly more critical of the group both immediately prior to and following their mass exodus to Guyana, both Jim Jones and Peoples Temple were being publicly recognized and lauded for their humanitarian efforts even within the year leading up to their deaths.

After working as a reverend in and around Indianapolis for a number of years, James Warren Jones, better known as Jim Jones, would organize his first church entitled Community Unity in 1954. The name of his church would not stick for long, and after moving to a larger building in 1955, his congregation would take up the moniker Peoples Temple.^[1] According to the Indianapolis Star, the first mention of Jim Jones appears in a 1953 article, when Jones was just twenty-two; the article describes the work of the young minister at a local orphanage.^[2]  The first mention of Peoples Temple in print seems to come from August of 1955, in an advert proclaiming their first service.^[3] It is evident that, even as early as their very first meeting, Jim Jones recognized the power of harnessing print media in both shaping the identity of his movement, as well as in attracting potential congregants.

Peoples Temple is reported to have the first interracial congregation in Indiana.^[4] Though their radical commitment to social justice and racial integration may have caused both backlash and skepticism (according to the same Indianapolis Star article published in 2013, Marceline Jones was reportedly spat on while walking with one of her adopted black children, possibly spurned by fears of miscegenation)^[5], these efforts aided in Jim Jones and Peoples Temple achieving both media attention and increased social standing. In a 1961 edition of the Indianapolis Recorder, it was reported that Jones was appointed director of the Human Rights Commission of the city of Indianapolis by the city’s mayor, for the pressure his congregants had been applying to local business to integrate.^[6] These early accounts disrupt the assumption that Jones only utilized social justice as a tool for his own personal gain, and showcase that Temple members were radical in choosing to join a fiercely progressive group despite apparent backlash. Peoples Temple’s commitment to integration is as old as Peoples Temple itself, and this fact, as well as the positive reception their social outreach efforts earned them, are critical in understanding how and why the group was able to attract such a substantial following. Jim Jones’s messages of unity that were being publicly broadcasted in the media, as well as his increasingly zealous style of Pentecostal preaching were key in garnering a large black membership base.

In 1965, Jones and about 145 of his Hoosier congregants departed Indiana altogether for greener pastures in Ukiah, California. Likely due to their renewed anonymity, there is relatively little print media published about Peoples Temple (outside of the occasional service advertisement) until they began to expand their ministries into San Francisco in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s. Despite the relative oddity of a group made up of staunch social progressives moving from Indiana to the Redwood Valley, and from the Redwood Valley to San Francisco and LA, articles which discuss the Temple are almost all incredibly positive when they do begin to appear. One of the Temple’s largest supporters in terms of media publications came in the form of the Sun-Reporter, an outlet specifically geared towards San Francisco’s black community. During the 1970s, the Sun-Reporter published dozens of articles praising the social outreach programs administered by the Temple. In 1971, the publisher of the Sun-Reporter, Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett, awarded Jones with the publication’s 1971 Special Merit Award, with Goodlett stating, “in the implementation of [Jim Jones’s] life, he has lifted his hand to reach the oppressed, the distraught, the lost at every opportunity.”^[7]

The Sun-Reporter was not the only black-aimed publication to express their vocal support of the Temple – the LA Sentinel also helped bolster their reception within the black communities of California. In January of 1975, the Sentinelpublished an article entitled “Peoples Opens Door to New Era,” which describes the Temple’s work with seniors, as well as their efforts to provide child care, legal counsel, education, and community activities and outreach to a diverse community. The article quotes Jones as saying, “Perhaps the most significant fact about Peoples Temple is that it has been able to forge a unified, active, and extensive congregation that has remarkable ethnic diversity.”^[8] This account is also one of few to feature direct testimony from a Temple member. Though she remains unnamed, the article quotes a female social worker as stating, “I just couldn’t get myself together… But I met Jim Jones and this beautiful group of people and they made the difference and I came out of a living death of drugs.”^[9] The article goes on to discuss how the Temple provides a positive place for young people that keeps them free of “race prejudice,” as well as providing the many senior citizens of the Temple with Temple-maintained residences, transport, and activities. The social outreach administered by the Temple that all of these publications extol was not at all preformative – Temple members were more than willing to provide humanitarian aid to those around them, and to publicly express support for their group.

In addition to their humanitarian efforts, media publications may also have been drawn to extolling the Temple due to their ardent support of the freedom of the press. In July of 1973, the Sentinel published a commendation of Peoples Temple for the “defense of reporters jailed for refusing to reveal their sources of information.”^[10] Unlike the common negative representations we see frequently today, both Peoples Temple and their contemporaneous news publications shared mutual respect. Within dozens upon dozens of images captured by the Peoples Temple Publications Department, hundreds of Temple members can be seen holding signs proclaiming their interest in protecting first amendment rights.^[11] The magnitude of the protests captured within these images highlight the agency that Temple members had within the group; far from the subservient and brainwashed subjects they’re frequently portrayed as, the majority-black congregants both young and old documented within these photographs paints an image of an empowered and socially-conscious group of people.

The Temple was frequently lauded for their genuine commitment to social social justice – in turn, the Temple were further made aware of the power of the media in bolstering the reputation of their movement. The fact that the outlets that showcased the most vocal support of the Temple were black-aimed and operated is also evidence of their genuine interest in integration and the services that the group were providing specifically for black communities. Given these facts, it is much more understandable why the most sizable demographic of Temple members were African-American.

Concurrently to the Sun-Reporter and Sentinel’s enthusiastic praise, Jones and the Temple gained more powerful allies in the forms of some of San Francisco’s most prominent democratic politicians, especially George Moscone. Moscone was running in the city’s mayoral elections in 1975, and as a hardcore liberal running against a staunch conservative in a city that was largely divided by race and class, he needed all of the votes he could get. Jones, recognizing the possibilities that allying himself with a candidate for mayor could present, pledged the support of his congregation to him. Moscone ended up winning the race by a small margin of only a few thousand votes, proving the value of gaining the support of the nearly 3,000 Temple members.^[12] The next year, as a direct outcome of his affiliations with Moscone, Jones was appointed to the San Francisco Housing Authority.

As a further result of his growing political connections, Jones and the Temple received even more media exaltation, with people like Moscone and Governor Jerry Brown publicly supporting and defending the group.^[13] In 1975, Jones was named one of the nation’s “One Hundred Outstanding Clergymen by Religion in Life Magazine. In 1976, Jones won the Los Angeles Herald’s Humanitarian of the Year award. In 1977, a year before the deaths of 918 Temple members including Jones, Jones won the annual Martin Luther King, Jr. Humanitarian of the Year award.^[14]

Though the Temple’s relationships with their political allies began to weaken as they prepared for their mass exodus to Guyana in 1977, the fact that they were able to gain political and media allies, as well as their ardent public support, showcases their legitimate commitment to integrationist and socially progressive ideologies. It’s also likely that the public support of these powerful allies shielded the Temple from many of the allegations and signs of abuse and corruption that were beginning to be raised by more critical parties.

In looking at the more positive external media representations of the Temple, the common narrative of the group being made up of brainwashed people and of Jones being a strictly negative force begins to unravel. Even if one does believe that Jones’s humanitarian efforts were purely motivated by desires to increase his own power social standing, this does not negate the genuine good that the Temple and its members were enacting, nor the reputation they were able to garner from it – especially considering that their reputations were heavily bolstered by some of the most influential and important political leaders of their time. Regardless of one’s own perception of the group, the widespread publicity of their humanitarian efforts certainly aided in attracting many of the Temple’s members, supporters, and critics.

Negative Media Reception

In spite of (or maybe, as a direct result of) their overwhelming support and the steady growth of their congregation, the Temple would begin to face increasing levels of public pressure and media scrutiny. In September of 1972, a series of four articles (out of an intended eight) were published, calling for a critical investigation into the Temple by the relevant authorities. Penned by the religion editor of the San Francisco Examiner, Lester Kinsolving, the articles levy multiple allegations of abuse, fiscal misappropriation, and fraud at the group, as well as describing and critiquing Jones’s claims of being a prophet.^[15] In retaliation against the perceived attack, Temple members began to picket the offices of the Examiner in protest. In response, the publication refused to publish the final four articles, showcasing both the power that the voices of Temple members had, as well as their early paranoia surrounding potential negative representations. The last successfully published Kinsolving article, entitled “Probe Asked of People’s Temple,” describes one Reverend Richard G. Taylor, a pastor in Ukiah, urging the State Attorney’s Office to conduct an investigation into Peoples Temple Christian Church. The article raised concerns about the suicide of a Temple member, who’s home was supposedly ransacked by other Temple members following her death – the article also worryingly described the presence of armed guards patrolling Peoples Temple church services, a claim that would prove truthful.

This specific article, the title and contents of which invoked the threat of governmental inquiry and interference into the group, is a likely reason as to why Temple members responded with so much aggression. These articles were not just perceived as character attacks; they were substantial threats to the livelihood of the group, and their publishing required the implementation of stricter guidelines within the Temple. According to Michael Bellefountaine in his book A Lavender Look at The Temple, “Indeed, Temple life had changed quite drastically after the Kinsolving exposé. More and more people were encouraged to live communally and work exclusively for the Temple, and contact with outsiders and family members who had not joined was discouraged” (Bellefountaine, 22).^[16] Additionally, the Temple developed an anonymous reporting system in which Temple members were encouraged to note the infractions of others following the release of the series. Kinsolving was not the only person to publish a series of articles calling for investigation of the group that month – Carolyn Pickering, a writer for the same Indianapolis Star that published some of the first articles describing Jones’s humanitarian efforts, also published a series of four articles levying many of the same allegations of abuse concurrently with Kinsolving’s. She too received heavy backlash from the Temple, though likely not as severe due to her distance from California.^[17]

Perhaps as a result of the intense backlash carried out by Temple members towards the Star and the Examiner, there’s relative radio silence from critics of the group until the floodgates were reopened by Marshall Kilduff in August of 1977. Kilduff’s article in New West was the longest and most extensive piece of media criticism imposed upon the Temple of its time, and as a result, the article is theorized by many to be one of the largest agitating factors in Jones’s decision to move the Temple to Guyana. According to Gabrielle Greenfield in an essay published on SDSU’s Alternative Considerations website, the motivation for the creation of the article was due to Kilduff taking note of the lack of criticism lodged towards the group since the Kinsolving exposé five years prior.^[18]

Oddly, the article actually begins by showcasing the duality of opinions regarding Jones and the Temple at the time. Kilduff reports that dozens of Peoples Temple supporters, including several “prominent Californians,”^[19] called into the offices of New West to provide their vocal support of the group. Many powerful people legitimately believed, if not in his exaltations of socialism, that Jones was providing critical aid and social services – enough so to defend him publicly. Even the more negative media analyses of the group of the time complicate the narrative that only gullible people followed Jones – even California governors were attesting to his character.

Despite all those pledging their support of Jones, both Jones and the Temple were beginning to garner a solid group of detractors. The article continues on to provide testimony from several ex-members describing the mental, verbal, and physical abuse they suffered during their tenure within the Temple. Several former members state that physical beatings were common during Temple meetings, especially in “catharsis sessions” in which congregants were ordered to lie on the floor while their friends, family members, and partners would criticize them.^[20] Another former member describes running a care home for emotionally disturbed boys under the Peoples Temple name and guidance – the checks issued by the county for the care of the boys were cashed out by higher ranking Temple members, with unknown amounts of it actually going to the home itself. The article continues by suggesting several reasons that the Temple should be investigated further by the relevant authorities, namely for their mismanagement of funds and potential fraudulent dealings.^[21]

The article ends with a section discrediting the public officials that co-signed Jones in phone calls to the publication’s offices, insinuating that their tenuous support of Jones was only done to secure critical election votes from Temple members; these comments are all made under a sub-heading entitled “Why Jim Jones Should Be Investigated.”^[22] Though the article is largely unbiased and does not use any inflammatory language to insult the group directly, publicly calling for an investigation into the Temple and into Jones specifically was likely to provoke their increasing and well documented paranoia surrounding government surveillance. Much like with the Kinsolving exposé, the release of Kilduff’s article was met with much backlash from Temple members. Though the vehement protestation of the article’s release by Temple members may have in part been due to their lack of appreciation for threats of governmental interference and inquiry, this incident stands in sharp opposition to the group’s well-documented defense of the free press.

The releases of the exposés published by Kinsolving and Kilduff prove not only the effect that the media had on Jim Jones and the Temple, but also the effect that Jones and the Temple had on the media. Though Peoples Temple and external media sources fought fiercely for control of the greater narrative of the Temple, this is a fight the Temple would go on to lose. The New West article released in August of 1977 (though rumors about its publication had been spreading since June of that year)^[23] spurred increasingly scathing media scrutiny of the group – especially with the growing vocalizations raised by a newly burgeoning group of critics composed of former Temple members and concerned relatives of Temple members (aptly named the Concerned Relatives), the same year. Not-so-coincidentally, large numbers of Peoples Temple members began to migrate to Guyana within the month that rumors of the article began to spread.

Concurrently with the release of the New West exposé, Tim and Grace Stoen, both ex-Temple members, were initiating court proceedings for the custody of their son, John Victor Stoen. Despite having given birth to a child fathered by Jones (done so with the signed permission of her husband Tim in an affidavit),^[24] Grace left the Temple in 1976, disenfranchised by the increasing amounts of financial mismanagement and sexual misconduct (the majority of which was carried out by Jones himself). Her estranged husband, Tim, had remained a member of the group, and took their son with him to Jonestown, Guyana in 1977. Grace Stoen had initially sued her husband for custody of John Victor, though Tim would soon reunite with his wife and join her in suing Jones for custody. Tim would go on to become the leader of the Concerned Relatives, the group most vocally opposed to Jones and the practices of the Temple.^[25]

In her book about millenarianism, religious studies scholar Catherine Wessinger explains that in their minds, liberating their relatives from Jones and the Temple “justified the use of any means, including telling exaggerated atrocity tales to the press and to government agents, kidnapping, and ‘deprogramming’” (Wessinger, 40).^[26] Like the news articles that had likely inspired their concerns, the Relatives also utilized print media in their efforts to publicly attack and defame the Temple. In one flyer distributed at press conferences and rallies opposing the Temple, they specifically label Jonestown a concentration camp in which people were threatened with death upon attempting to leave.^[27] The flyer pleads with readers to help in petitioning the government to investigate the group and have Jones expelled from Guyana – a threat that certainly would have magnified Jones’s fears of government surveillance and overreach. This particular flyer was found at and recovered from Jonestown by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, highlighting the Temple’s close monitoring of media that mentioned them.

The allegations levied by former members would eventually lead to an investigation by the US Treasury, likely spurring Jones’s fears of involvement with the IRS.^[28] The pressures applied to the group by external media coverage, in conjunction with Jones’s established anxieties about the threat of nuclear war (a paranoia also exacerbated by the media – an article published in Esquire naming the area surrounding the Redwood Valley the safest place to live in the United States in the event of nuclear war had inspired Jones’s initial move of the Temple from Indianapolis to Ukiah in the 1960s)^[29] and socialist ideologies in strong opposition to capitalistic American values had all likely led to the hasty migration of nearly one thousand Temple members to Guyana between the months of July and September of 1977. The specific actions taken by Kilduff and the Concerned Relatives were likely instrumental in Jones’s decision to relocate as they harnessed a particularly powerful weapon against the idealistic and utopian claims of Jones and the Temple – the damning testimonies of members who had willingly left.

Many of the groups most vocal opponents and defectors had once been high ranking members of the Temple (Tim Stoen had been a lawyer for the Temple; Grace Stoen had a child with Jones), and Jones’s fear of these testimonies potentially causing the resolve of the flock he has spent so many years carefully garnering to falter is evident in his heavy censorship of media entering and exiting Jonestown, almost completely confirming that the media had in some way played a role in his decision to move. In an audio tape recovered from Jonestown by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Tape Q271), Jones can be heard explicitly stating, “we open and read it there and transfer it to you here so you can know how to read. As for outgoing mail, it must be written in front of the letter-writing committee. People must not send out newspaper articles, nor may they ask the photographer to take pictures to send back to the States.”^[30] Jones recognized the power of the media in shaping perception of the Temple, and as such was intent on keeping his membership isolated. Regardless of his oversight, as demonstrated by the staunch protest against articles written to damage their reputation, Temple members were not easily swayed, were agents in taking their own action against those they perceived as threatening their livelihood.

Though external print media which negatively covered Peoples Temple may have, in part, been backed by the earnest motivation of aiding relatives who had supposedly become swept up by Jones (especially considering the growing prominence of both anti-cult sentiment in the 1970s following the Tate-LaBianca murders and the fear of socialism during the ever-present Cold War), the evidence indicates that this critical press coverage only fueled Jim Jones’s (and, vicariously, the Peoples Temple’s) paranoia. The reaction to the negative representation also indicates the ways in which Temple members defended the Temple and took radical action against detractors of their own volition. Similarly to the way in which an Esquire article had urged their move to Ukiah, the publications produced by Temple opponents had urged Peoples Temple to flee to Guyana.

Leo Ryan Arrives in Jonestown

Even after leaving the United States, the growing negative reputation of the Temple still invoked fears of potential scrutiny or investigation by government forces – and these anxieties were not entirely misplaced. Californian Congressman Leo J. Ryan was first alerted to the allegations of abuse against the Temple by Kilduff’s New West exposé; however, it was another article published in the San Francisco Examiner on November 13, 1977 by Tim Reiterman that spurred his desire to investigate the Temple more critically.^[31] Reiterman’s story, entitled “Peoples Temple and a Father’s Grief,” described a man named Robert Houston urging investigations into the alleged abuses committed by the Temple after his son, a member of the Temple, had died under what he referred to as suspicious circumstances.^[32]

Robert Houston had been Leo Ryan’s roommate in college. His account, in conjunction with pressure added by both the media and correspondences with Tim Stoen, prompted him to begin an inquiry. Though the State Department had desired to send representatives to Jonestown to conduct a formal investigation in response to the overwhelming number of welfare checks requested by relatives of Temple members, this process would require much time to receive approval. As an individual, Ryan had the unique ability to quickly organize his own trip to Jonestown, and he would do so in a way that ensured the world was aware.^[33] In November of 1978, Leo Ryan, seventeen relatives of Temple members, several newspaper reporters, and an NBC TV team arrived in Jonestown.^[34]

On November 8th and November 16th, the same Marshall Kilduff responsible for the 1977 exposé commonly believed to have in part motivated the mass exodus to Guyana published two articles in the San Francisco Chronicle discussing Ryan’s planned week-long “fact-finding trip” to Guyana. The end of the article published on the 8th ominously mentions that, “Ryan said he sent a telegram to Jones about the planned trip but he had not heard directly from the minister.”^[35] In fact, Temple members had explicitly warned Ryan that he and his party were unwelcome.^[36]

A day after Kilduff’s November 16th article, Ryan and his party arrived at Jonestown. A day later, Leo Ryan, two members of the NBC TV crew, a newspaper photographer, and Temple defector Patty Parks would be shot dead by Temple members at the Port Kaituma airstrip. Hours later, 913 Temple members living on Guyana would also perish. The final news representatives attempting to cover the story of Jonestown during its lifespan ended up deceased. Indeed, with the arrival of Ryan and his cohort of journalists, the story of Jonestown concluded with the presence of the media, though its legacy would continue.

Conclusion

Though the story of Peoples Temple may initially present a picture of gullible people falling prey to a megalomaniac, looking at their depictions in print media prior to the events of November 18, 1978 presents a more nuanced and complex narrative. The articles which display their social activism, commendations, and the several humanitarian awards Jim Jones received help in explaining why thousands of people chose to believe in Jones’s messages, many enough to die for.

Temple members weren’t just minor league activists involved in small, performative projects – they were publicly recognized by some of the most prominent people of their time for their legitimate and genuine efforts at combating systemic injustice. Simultaneously, many of the articles and print sources which portray the Temple negatively provide real first-person testimonies from former members, in which they describe abuses that they faced. Neither the exaltations nor the more critical examinations can be negated, as they both provide essential means for understanding the full scope of the Peoples Temple narrative. Though some of the more aggressive media attacks may have, in part, motivated the course the Temple would eventually feel compelled to take, the anxieties raised in these assaults should also be understood against the wider context of fears of socialism invoked by the Cold War and increasing anti-cult sentimentality. It’s as easy to write off the critical journalists, Concerned Relatives, and Leo Ryan for being belligerent as it is to write off Temple members for being gullible – both parties had legitimate motivations and concerns.

Peoples Temple was a product of their time and circumstance. Temple members were compelled towards their eventual leave from the United States both because of mounting political tensions and societal struggles, and because of increasing media scrutiny. At the same time, the media criticizing them also reflected global fears like the Cold War, increasing anxieties about the potential of brainwashing, and deadly ‘cults.’ Looking at the media reception of the Temple prior to November 18, 1978, humanizes not only Temple members by providing potential explanations for the reasons they chose to join and remain in the Temple, but also Temple detractors as it explains why they both felt and reacted so strongly.

This investigation also highlights that, despite the harsh and scrutinous publicity the Temple would receive towards the end of their run, their overwhelmingly negative reputation was not achieved until after the deaths. Though the research questions have been answered, nothing is truly explained. Examining media that was produced in reference to Jones and the Temple throughout the course of their active existences complicates the story and proves that an amalgamation of social and political forces resulted in both the formation of the Temple, the construction of the narrative of the Temple, and the end of the Temple.

Bibliography

^[1] Hugh B. Urban, New Age, Neopagan, and New Religious Movements: Alternative Spirituality in Contemporary America, University of California Press, 2015, JSTOR, 246.

^[2] Dawn Mitchell and Michael Jesse, “Retro Indy: Jim Jones and the People’s Temple in Indianapolis,” Indianapolis Star, November 18, 2013. https://www.indystar.com/story/news/history/retroindy/2013/11/18/peoples-temple/3634925/.

^[3] “First Peoples Temple,” Indianapolis Star, August 1955, retrieved from the Indianapolis Star Archive, March 29 2025. https://indystar.newspapers.com/img/thumbnail/311425082/330/200/4021_393_759_460/0/yes/4248_600_305_46.jpg?cs=86400.

^[4] Michael Bellefountaine and Dora Bellefountaine, A Lavender Look at The Temple: A Gay Perspective of The Peoples Temple, iUniverse Publishing, 2011, The Jonestown Institute, 3.

^[5] Mitchell and Jesse, “Retro Indy.”

<^[6] “Integrationist Pastor Named to City Rights Post,” Indianapolis Recorder, February 25, 1961, retrieved from the Hoosier State Chronicles, March 29, 2025, 3. https://newspapers.library.in.gov/?a=d&d=INR19610225-01.1.3&e=——-en-20-INR-81-byDA-txt-txIN——-.

^[7] Leona Tompkies, “Church Section: Bay Area Church News and Activities,” Sun-Reporter, April 19, 1972, ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/docview/370774235/6397F691C90C4C27PQ/2?sourcetype=Newspapers.

^[8] “Peoples Opens Door to New Era,” Los Angeles Sentinel, January 23, 1975, C-8, ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/docview/565181929/fulltextPDF/64D86038418C4AA3PQ/1?accountid=13894&sourcetype=Historical%20Newspapers.

^[9] “Peoples Opens Door to New Era,” Los Angeles Sentinel, January 23, 1975, C-8, ProQuest.

^[10] “Record Commends Peoples Temple,” Los Angeles Sentinel, July 19, 1973, ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/docview/565038012?sourcetype=Historical%20Newspapers.

^[11] Peoples Temple Publications Department, Los Angeles March, 1976 – 1977, retrieved from the California Historical Society Digital Library. https://digitallibrary.californiahistoricalsociety.org/islandora/search/%22Peoples%20Temple%22?type=dismax&islandora_solr_search_navigation=1&f%5B0%5D=mods_titleInfo_title_ms%3A%22Los%5C%20Angeles%5C%20march%22.

^[12] James De Planta, “Which Group or Individual Outside Peoples Temple Had The Most Significant Impact on Jim Jones’ Decision to Order The Jonestown Massacre?” The Jonestown Institute, modified November 27, 2023. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=81646.

^[13] De Planta, “Which Group or Individual,” The Jonestown Institute.

^[14] David Chidester, Salvation and Suicide: An Interpretation of Jim Jones, the Peoples Temple, and Jonestown, revised edition, Indiana University Press, 2003, 8.

^[15] The Jonestown Institute, “Lester Kinsolving Series on Peoples Temple,” accessed March 29, 2025. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=14081.

^[16]  Bellefountaine, A Lavender Look at The Temple, 22.

^[17] The Jonestown Institute, “Peoples Temple and Carolyn Pickering,” accessed March 29, 2025. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=18807.

^[18] Gabrielle Greenfield, “The Impact of Journalism on Jim Jones and Peoples Temple: Examining New West’s Investigative Report,” The Jonestown Institute, modified December 21, 2022. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=64969#_ftn4.

^[19] Marshall Kilduff and Phil Tracy, “Inside Peoples Temple,” New West, August 1, 1977, The Jonestown Institute, accessed March 29, 2025, 31. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/newWestart.pdf.

^[20] Kilduff and Tracy, “Inside Peoples Temple,” New West, 34.

^[21] Kilduff and Tracy, “Inside Peoples Temple,” New West, 38.

^[22] Kilduff and Tracy, “Inside Peoples Temple,” New West, 38.

^[23] Greenfield, “The Impact of Journalism on Jim Jones and Peoples Temple,” The Jonestown Institute.

^[24] Greenfield, “The Impact of Journalism,” The Jonestown Institute.

^[25] Bonnie Yates, “Leo Ryan: How Did His Trip to Jonestown Come Together, and Why?” The Jonestown Institute, modified November 27, 2023. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=102670.

^[26] Catherine Wessinger, How the Millennium Comes Violently: From Jonestown to Heaven’s Gate. Seven Bridges Publishing, 2000, accessed March 29, 2025, The Internet Archive.

^[27] Concerned Relatives Flyer, Federal Bureau of Investigation (Document ID: RYMUR 89-4286-II-70-II-71), retrieved March 29, 2025. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/ConRelflyer.pdf.

^[28]  Urban, New Age, 253.

^[29] Caroline Bird, “Nine Places To Hide,” Esquire, January 1, 1962. The Jonestown Institute. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Nine-Places-to-Hide.pdf.

^[30] Jim Jones (speaker), “Q271 Transcript,” The Jonestown Institute, recorded September 19, 1978, accessed March 29, 2025. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=27404.

^[31] Yates, “Leo Ryan,” The Jonestown Institute.

^[32] Tim Reiterman, “People’s Temple and a Father’s Grief,” San Francisco Examiner, November 13, 1977, retrieved from Digital Jonestown, March 29, 2025. https://digitaljonestown.library.drake.edu/files/2017/03/PeoplesTempleandaFathersGrief.pdf.

^[33] Yates, “Leo Ryan,” The Jonestown Institute.

^[34] Maitland Zane, “Surviving the Heart of Darkness: Twenty years later, Jackie Speier remembers how her companions and rum helped her endure the night of the Jonestown massacre,” San Francisco Chronicle, November 13, 1998, retrieved from The Internet Archive, March 29, 2025. https://web.archive.org/web/20010718143941/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1998/11/13/PN93318.DTL.

^[35] Marshall Kilduff, “Ryan to Visit Rev. Jones’ Jungle Refuge,” San Francisco Chronicle, November 8, 1978, retrieved from The Jonestown Institute on March 29, 2025. https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=112787.

^[36] Zane, “Surviving the Heart of Darkness.”