Given a document, an entity and its sentiment towards the entity, verify if it is the correct sentiment towards the entity. Answer should be yes or no. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Reynolds is Neutral . Imagine Dragons lead singer Dan Reynolds  said  he  hoped a recently released documentary on Mormonism would prompt church leaders to change some of their ways.
Reynolds  who described  himself  as a “fourth generation Las Vegan raised in a very conservative Mormon family ” and Don Argott  director of “Believer” documentary  told Deadline they hoped the film would open the church leaders' eyes to how they treat LGBT members.
 Reynolds  said  he  had planned on attending Brigham Young University  a college owned by the Mormon Church  like  his  brothers  but spoke to a bishop and things went downhill from there.
 Reynolds  said  he  was kicked out of the school after  he  told the bishop  he  had sex with a longtime girlfriend.
“That kind of started my story in a lot of ways  because I went through this real shaming process  where my whole community kind of found out that I was ‘sinful’ or ‘dirty’ in the Mormon world ”  Reynolds  told Deadline.
“There’s a real problem in the Mormon culture. It’s broken ”  Reynolds  said. “We wanted to shine a light on that and hopefully create some change.”
The Mormon Church has acknowledged the documentary and endorsed his LoveLoud festival  which focused on people part of the LGBT community who hope to start conversations with the church. However   Reynolds  said that was not enough.
“The policies remain intact ”  Reynolds  said. “They say being gay is a sin  and until that’s taken away  speaking in platitudes and even endorsing this festival  it’s a step  but there’s a long way to go as far as moving forward.”
MACAULAY CULKIN CLAIMS FATHER WAS ‘MENTALLY AND PHYSICALLY’ ABUSIVE: ‘DO GOOD OR I’LL HIT  YOU’
Reynolds  said that  despite its policies   he  is still a member of the church. The Mormon Church forbids same-sex couples in the congregation to baptize their children and take “other religious rites until they become adults ’ the Salt Lake Tribune reported.
“As long as those policies are still intact our LGBT youth still have high percentages of depression  anxiety and suicide ” Reynolds told the Tribune.
yes

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Schaffer Wice is Neutral . The media-savvy special prosecutors have colluded with the Fourth Estate to try — and convict — Paxton in the court of public opinion long before the case even comes to trial.  Wice  in particular is an aspiring media celebrity  serving as a TV “legal analyst” on Houston’s Channel 2 (KPRC) since 2003. Think of a male version of Nancy Grace or Greta Van Susteren — a Dan Abrams wannabe. One profile described the bombastic  Wice  as a “media magnet” who “never shies away from the spotlight.” The KPRC website brags that
Beginning the very day  Schaffer  and Wice were appointed by Becker  the prosecutors were in contact with the media  shamelessly promoting themselves by mass distributing press statements and publicity photos.  Schaffer  and  Wice  obviously intended to milk the case for all the news coverage they could get  for two self-serving reasons: to poison the well of public opinion against Paxton  and to generate free advertising to attract future clients. Neither motive is ethical for a special prosecutor. Yet   Wice  has conceded that pretrial media coverage “impacts the way potential jurors view our client’s case long before they are ushered into the courtroom for voir dire. Being able to effectively represent your client on the courthouse steps can be every bit as important as representing them inside the courtroom.”
Moreover   Wice  once cynically acknowledged the economic benefits of making media appearances  informing fellow lawyers that “appearing on TV is client development — free advertising — that might well yield future business. And you never can tell what that one local  or  with a bit of good fortune  national TV appearance  can do for you or your practice.” Exploiting the media  in other words  is the latest form of ambulance chasing. “Celebrity” attorneys  like the Kardashians  are famous for being famous.
In that vein  Schaffer and Wice continued a steady stream of self-aggrandizing communications with the press corps during the “investigation” and grand jury phases  despite the strict secrecy associated with the grand jury process. The special prosecutors had numerous communications (by email and telephone) with the New York Times’ reporter early in the case  following which the NYT reported Paxton’s indictment on August 1  2015  before the indictment was even unsealed. Was this national media scoop a coincidence? The special prosecutors were the obvious source of the highly-unprofessional leak  but the press corps gratefully reciprocated by uncritically reporting  Wice ’s spin as “news.”
In addition to regularly sending eager reporters status updates and copies of pleadings and orders  on at least two occasions  Wice  circulated to the media Paxton’s annual Personal Financial Statement  presumably to encourage reporters to scrutinize the donors to Paxton’s legal defense fund — a wholly improper purpose. In an even more egregious breach of propriety   Wice  emailed a copy of Paxton’s booking “mugshot” to his KPRC colleague  reporter Phil Archer  shortly after Paxton was released on bail. The only word to describe this type of conduct is “sleazy.”
Intemperately denouncing Paxton’s legal arguments as “frivolous” and “clearly baseless ” the special prosecutors’ tone toward Paxton dripped with contempt as they delivered sound bites to groveling reporters on deadline. When asked by a reporter about a new attorney joining the Paxton defense team to deal with the federal civil case (which was ultimately dismissed with prejudice)   Schaffer  sarcastically responded “Never heard of him. Looks like we set off the Lawyer Relief Act…” When a prominent Paxton supporter wrote an op-ed in the Midland Reporter-Telegram  criticizing the indictment  the thin-skinned prosecutors immediately issued a florid press statement — presumably on the taxpayers’ nickel — condemning the piece as a “rant” containing “lies bathed in the cologne of half-truths  fabrications and disinformation.”
Mimicking the prosecutors’ flippant and unprofessional tone  some reporters began running stories with shockingly-unbalanced headlines  such as “Another Day  Another Idiotic Ken Paxton Motion ” which  Schaffer  and Wice gleefully circulated to their media contacts  with the message “I love it.” If media outlets did not parrot the prosecutors’ swaggering narrative  they were cut off from “insider access.”
This incestuous arrangement likely explains why the Dallas Morning News  which was closely following the Paxton case  never reported the bombshell mentioned in Part 2 — that  Schaffer  was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal RICO case against the leader of the Bandidos motorcycle gang — a revelation that would have greatly tarnished the special prosecutors’ undeserved Boy Scout image — which McGaughy had gone to extraordinary lengths to burnish.
This apparently referred to Paxton’s retention of a defense team that included Dan Cogdell and Philip Hilder  with respect to whom  Schaffer  and Wice issued polite public statements.
The hundreds of email exchanges between the prosecutors and reporters (McGaughy in particular) are clearly collusive. With the avid cooperation of the press corps  for two and a half years  Schaffer  and Wice have been busy smearing Paxton through leaks and planted stories  all while risibly claiming to be “seeking justice on behalf of the people of Texas.”
To re-cap this series: The baseless  politicized prosecution of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been a travesty on many levels. Following the recusal of Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis  the matter should not have been referred to mercenary “special prosecutors” for investigation;  Schaffer  (the unindicted co-conspirator in a RICO case) and Wice (an incorrigible diva) were not suitable for the assignment in any event; the open-ended compensation arrangement agreed to by Judge Scott Becker was both unlawful and foolhardy; the grand jury indictment improperly obtained by the unscrupulous prosecutors amounts to fabricated felonies — made-up crimes never previously prosecuted in a Texas court; the overtly-biased George Gallagher presided over the case as a farcical kangaroo court; changing the venue of the case to Harris County was an absurd and outrageous denial of due process to Paxton; et cetera  ad infinitum.
no

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity David Scotton is Positive . David Scotton  in I Lived on Parker Avenue (trailer image via YouTube)
A documentary about a young man who is grateful to  his  birth mother as well as to  his  adoptive parents.
Do you want to meet gratitude? Then  David Scotton âs your man. At a time when we are taking public-policy advice from traumatized  grieving young students  consider this eternally grateful one.
 David Scotton  is a 24-year-old law student with a little movie with a big message. Adopted at birth   he  allowed  with some hesitation and prayer  a filmmaker to follow along  his  journey from New Orleans to Indiana when  he  was 19 to meet  his  birth parents.
The other day at the Sheen Center in Lower Manhattan  I heard George Weigel  the John Paul II biographer  assert that people of heroic virtue are all around us. Saints  they are frequently known as â in this case  though  not canonized and in Heaven but living in our midst  often unaware that they are sources of great grace and inspiration.  David Scottonâs  birth mother is chief among them. And all those things about saints is true of  her   if the documentary I Lived on Parker Avenue is any indication.
One of the first things  she  wants to do is seek forgiveness from David. For so many years  this mother  suffered with worry that the boy  she  gave birth to would be hurt by the fact that  she  chose to âgive him up for adoption â as the expression goes. Our language for adoption seems to suggest abandonment when  in fact  it is just about the greatest and most loving sacrifice. I think of the story  from the State of the Union some weeks ago  of the young police officer and his wife and a woman named Crystal who is suffering in the grip of addiction. But  she  wants better for  her  baby. And there is a couple who can help  her  realize that aspiration. As there was in the case of  David .
Melissa had the added guilt that she and her boyfriend not only considered abortion when she was pregnant with  David  but that she went to the clinic. In I Lived on Parker Avenue she describes the dramatically painful scene she ran out from. In one of the most uplifting scenes Iâve ever watched on video  Melissa and  David  visit the spot where that clinic once stood. (Itâs a health clinic now  and abortions are no longer performed there.) For him  itâs like the opposite of a memorial dedicated to some grave event. It was there where he was given new life  even in the womb. She should feel no guilt. She gave life and love to  David  and to  his  adoptive mom and dad.
The beauty of I Lived on Parker Avenue is that  in some respects  it isnât primarily about abortion or even adoption  though promotion of âthe adoption optionâ is certainly this young manâs mission. Itâs about gratitude. One of the most compelling scenes of the 30-minute film occurs when  David  expresses in letters â personalized and everything  there are communications beyond text messages still! â what his adoptive family means to him. He wanted to assure his parents and extended family and friends that meeting his birth parents had nothing to do with finding his âtrueâ parents and everything with saying âThank you.â
âWith only two adoptions to every 100 abortions in the United States  and with the stigmas society still unfortunately shares about adoption  it is important to get this film out there â  David  tells me. âEven though I am adopted  I am no different than a biological child. Even though my parents are my âadoptiveâ parents  they are my mom and dad. My âbirthâ parents are exactly that: birth parents. Those distinctions are real and need to be shared.â

yes