GetReligion
Wednesday, April 02, 2025

Daily Mail

, , , , , , ,

Did the Vatican lie about abuse reforms? GlobalPost says so, but doesn't shoot straight

, , , , , , ,

The Vatican didn’t talk. A critic talked. Guess how the story turned out?

USA Today's story, on a layman who says the church's effort to stem child abuse is a sham, is defensibly derogatory. As I've said often, you usually can't stop a story by stonewalling media. You only succeed in giving your foes the sole say.

That's one thing. It's another thing to link the commission piece with a previous story on an anti-abuse training session for bishops. It's still another thing not to make sure you have the latest info.

Here's the top:

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil — A member of a commission set up by Pope Francis to advise him on child abuse says the group is a "token body" exercising in "smoke and mirrors" that won’t help children stay safe from abusive priests.
Peter Saunders, the commission member, is now on a leave of absence as he considers whether to continue with an effort he says he has lost faith in.
Meanwhile, new Catholic bishops are still being taught they’re not obliged to report cases of child abuse by priests to the police.
The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, which Francis set up with much fanfare in 2014, was supposed to issue guidelines for the Vatican on how to deal with child abuse. But the body was never consulted about the training for new bishops on exactly that topic.
These are just some of the signs that Francis’ reform efforts, and his pledge to clean up the Catholic Church’s most damaging crisis, seem to be unraveling before they’ve even really gotten started.

The article is a reprint from GlobalPost, a news site based in Boston. GlobalPost partners with older media including NBC News and NPR, as well as USA Today. The piece on Saunders is a spinoff of the site's yearlong investigation of accused priestly abusers, saying several from America and Europe were sent to "poor, remote parishes." GlobalPost evidently saw Pope Francis' visit to the continent as a good time hook.

Apparently, the news site also called Saunders, rather than wait for him to call them:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , ,

Pope, Paris and ISIS: mainstream media coverage broad but shallow

, , , , , , ,

Pope Francis didn’t just criticize the ISIS attacks in Paris. He pretty much damned them. His weekend reactions used both religious and humanitarian terms – "blasphemy," "not human," "homicidal hatred." It was some of Francis' strongest language yet.

But not everyone in mainstream media looked much below the surface – either at his comments or those of ISIS.

Catholic News Service, of course, spotted the religious content quickly:

The attacks, Pope Francis said, were an "unspeakable affront to the dignity of the human person."
"The path of violence and hatred cannot resolve the problems of humanity, and using the name of God to justify this path is blasphemy," he said.
Pope Francis asked the thousands of people who gathered at St. Peter's for the Sunday midday prayer to observe a moment of silence and to join him in reciting a Hail Mary.
"May the Virgin Mary, mother of mercy, give rise in the hearts of everyone thoughts of wisdom and proposals for peace," he said. "We ask her to protect and watch over the dear French nation, the first daughter of the church, over Europe and the whole world."
"Let us entrust to the mercy of God the innocent victims of this tragedy," the pope said.

And other reports? Well, some simply patched together other reports. One of those was HuffPost, which linked to seven other stories in less than 230 words (although three were other HuffPo stories). The article also cites Francis saying the attacks are part of a "piecemeal Third World War," drawn from an interview with TV2000, the network of the Italian Bishops' Conference.

It's a phrase he has often used. The Washington Times points out that he said much the same at an Italian World War I cemetery in 2014. But don’t give the Times too much credit for enterprise reporting: It linked to BBC's coverage of the pope's visit there.

Even the combined forces of CBS News and the Associated Press yielded a pitiful 280 words or so on Sunday. And it's nearly all soundbites: "blasphemy," "barbarity," "third world war," "no justification for these things." The main addition was his condolence to French President Francois Hollande, who vowed "merciless" war on ISIS.

One might excuse AP/CBS for haste because the report ran on Sunday morning, but no. Not when Crux, the Catholic newsmagazine of the Boston Globe, ran a more thorough report the day before – a report that showed a Sunday update:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , ,

Lifeboat ethics for sixth-graders, and media don't bother with religious insights

, , , ,

You have your traditional leaky boat and 15 people aboard. Whom do you throw out first? Second? Third?

People get upset over stuff like that, you know: grading one human's worth over that of another. Especially when it's forced onto preteen children.

Yes, forced. Students in a middle school near Tampa were required to decide whether a variety of people – from a Hispanic woman to a "black guy" to a pregnant woman to Justin Bieber – were worth saving. Yet no one reporting it sought feedback from ministers, ethicists or anyone else who deals with such matters all the time.

At least one parent was mad enough to raise hell to a local NBC affiliate, yielding a story that echoed in several states and even overseas.

Our saga starts at Giunta Middle School, where a history teacher set out the wrenching "activity." As WFLA tells it:

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, Fla. (WFLA) – Valerie Kennel is mad and she wants answers. She was furious when her sixth-grade daughter from Giunta Middle School in Riverview came home with something called "The Lifeboat Test," where students were forced to make a choice.
Who would they save on a sinking ship? Who lives and who dies? There are 15 choices listed on the test, but only nine people can be picked to survive. Their descriptions include race, gender and religion. Kennel tells News Channel 8, "It’s racist in every form."
"This had nothing to do with history, nothing to do with it, and what is it teaching them?" she added.

The very choices sound absurd, according to the list published in the London Daily Mail. Besides the above-mentioned, they include Donald Trump and Barack Obama, male and female doctors, black and white men, an ex-convict and a police officer, someone named "Mr. Bobo," and even the class teacher, Mr. Hagerman (no first name given).

Oh yeah, they also got religion into the exercise. Among the candidates for sink-or-swim were a rabbi and a minister. Maybe that's appropriate: The whole moral/religious aspect of the lifeboat drill was submerged, not only by the school but by the media. More on that shortly.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Muslim wins bake-off! Mainstream media are captivated!

, , , , , ,

"African Christian bakes winning cake." Great story, eh?

No? Well, how about "South American Jew bakes winning cake"?

Still doesn't stir the blood? Then "Asian Muslim bakes winning cake" should.

That did it for much of the British press and, unfortunately, the United States' dominant newspaper as well.

"Muslim Winner of Baking Contest Defies Prejudice in Britain," trumpets the New York Times. Then it tells the story of a second-generation Bangladeshi who's just won a popular TV baking show.

"The victory of Nadiya Jamir Hussain, a petite 30-year-old, head-scarf-wearing mother of three from northern England, in a wildly popular reality show called 'The Great British Bake Off' on Wednesday has been greeted by many in Britain as a symbol of immigration success," the paper says.

The article tags her as an "observant Muslim," without saying how, other than her hijab. It says she has "spurred debate about national identity," although she was born in England. And it says she is seen as "an example of female empowerment," like it's unusual for a woman to win a bake-off.

Then the story shifts into fourth-gear flattery:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , ,

Turkey and that 'genocide' -- Armenian anger, Erdogan's denial, Obama's silence

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Turkey and that 'genocide' -- Armenian anger, Erdogan's denial, Obama's silence

The British tabloids are not known for nuance and this Daily Mail piece on Turkey's continued denial that "genocide" accurately describes what happened to its Armenian population in the early 20th century – an event officially commemorated this week – is no exception.

"Genocide of the Christians: The blood-soaked depravity exceeded even today's atrocities by Islamic State – now, 100 years on Turkey faces global disgust at its refusal to admit butchering over a MILLION Armenians," screamed the Mail's wordy online headline.

No beating around the bush here, is there? American-style journalistic even-handedness? Forget about it. Hyperbole? For sure.

"Global disgust" is a bit much when the criticism appears limited to Western sources. Worse than the Islamic State? Pardon me if I decline to compare an historical atrocity with an ongoing one. (Though I will say that the Daily Mail piece fails to note that while Armenians are of course Christians, they're generally Orthodox Christians. That detail hints at historical context you can't expect all readers to know.)

You could argue that citing a story's sensationalist tabloid treatment is manipulative. I'll cede that. But then there's Pope Francis and the European Union. Both also found it necessary in recent days to speak out on what they unequivocally view to be a clear case of genocide – the 1915 massacre of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks, the precursors to today's Turkish republic. Germany, home to a Turkish immigrant population estimated at more than 3 million, has signaled it, too – in addition to its stand within the EU -- will begin to apply the term "genocide" to this historical tragedy.

Unsurprisingly, the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has reacted strongly to all this.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, ,

For Washington Post, Indy law is all business -- except for those who favor it

, ,

Religious freedom laws are bad for business. That's the upshot of the Washington Post's Monday indepth on the new, much-debated law there.

The story highlights Hoosier hand-wringing over what might happen, without really nailing down how widespread the anxieties are. And it takes a sympathetic tone toward gays and their friends, but stiffly proper toward those who favor the new law.

A caveat: I am not talking about about the law itself. That matter turned moot yesterday, when Gov. Mike Pence signed a package of changes in the law, banning discrimination based on "race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or United States military service." Besides, my focus here, as in other GetReligion pieces, is mainstream media coverage of religious and moral issues.

And with few exceptions, the Post article fall short. For one, it starts and ends on the side of those who wanted to change or repeal the law:

INDIANAPOLIS — At Calvin Fletcher’s Coffee Company, a sign taped to the front door says, “WE SERVE EVERYONE,” inviting out-of-towners of all sexual orientations to enjoy an organic mocha latte.
At Silver in the City, a downtown gift shop, Kristin Kohn quickly sold out of rainbow-themed T-shirts with the words: “We like you here.” And at Chilly Water Brewing Company about a mile from Lucas Oil Stadium, home to this weekend’s NCAA men’s basketball Final Four, owner Skip DuVall assured customers that no one — gay or straight — would be denied a pale ale.
“This thing is suicide,” DuVall said of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a new state law that many view as a license to discriminate. “It makes us look bad. Real bad.”

The story bears several marks of an attempt to demonstrate a trend without showing actual numbers:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , ,

Los Angeles Times sounds alarms on Boko Haram -- why not just report?

, , , ,

Just one day after Boko Haram pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, the Los Angeles Times was already publishing an instant analysis – without so labeling it.

Whatever happened to cooler heads prevailing? Instead, we get "Yahhhh! They're coming for us!" right from the lede:

The decision by the Nigerian extremist group Boko Haram to pledge allegiance to Islamic State amounts to a significant propaganda coup for the Syrian-based organization, analysts say, and raises questions about whether the Nigerian militants could morph into a more global threat.

Global threat? C'mon, LATimes, stick to what you know. Your article wasn't labeled "Analysis" or "Commentary," and it should have stayed that way. Especially when your article doesn't back up that wild allegation. And in some places, contradicts it.

The Times recites what you already know, if you’ve read any Boko Haram news in the last five years: villages overrun, Nigerian soldiers routed, civilians slaughtered, students murdered in their own schools, girls abducted and sold as slaves, children used as suicide bombers.

The article notes also that the Islamic State uses similar terror tactics, something you also probably knew. The Times then tries to dial up the fear factor by guessing at the implications of a relationship with the Islamic State.

Military support could be one, the newspaper's sources say. But even then, the crystal ball is hazy: "What’s not clear is the extent to which Boko Haram – whose insurgency has been largely a local fight against the Nigerian state – might begin to attack Western targets in Nigeria."

Nor does the Times show that by joining the IS sphere, Boko Haram could become a more global threat (as if it's one now). Not when the paper offers this background:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

Another American beheaded: Peter Kassig became a Muslim while in captivity, but was his conversion genuine?

, , , , ,

"An act of pure evil."

That's how President Barack Obama characterized the latest beheading of an American by the Islamic State terrorist organization.

Most of the news stories I read Sunday — including that of Peter Kassig's hometown Indianapolis Star — referenced Kassig's reported conversion to Islam while in captivity.

The Star's lede:

Indianapolis native Peter Kassig, who converted to Islam and changed his name to Abdul-Rahman during his yearlong captivity by Islamic State militants, has been beheaded, U.S. officials confirmed Sunday.
He was 26.
The Islamic State group distributed a video via social media early Sunday to announce the execution of Kassig, a humanitarian worker and former U.S. Army Ranger captured last year in Syria.
Survivors include his parents, Ed and Paula Kassig, Indianapolis, who said Sunday they were "heartbroken" by the news and pledged to "work every day to keep his legacy alive as best we can."


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, ,

Shogun wedding: 'Ninja sister wives' attack, insightful reporting flees

, ,

From reports out of Utah, it sounds like two women swapped marital skills for martial arts. And many media swapped solid substance for juicy soundbites.

Here's an early report from The Guardian. Yep, the story even got attention in London.

Two armed “polygamist women” dressed like “ninjas” were subdued by a sword-wielding man during a home invasion, according to police in suburban Utah.
Police said the two women, aged 18 and 22, were attacking the home of a witness and victim in a criminal child sex assault case against a man the women called their “husband”.
The women “violently attacked one of the adult males in the house who came to see who was coming,” Ian Adams of the West Jordan police department told the Guardian.
“Another adult male joined the fray in defense of the first male victim. He was armed with a sword, and using a sword … and with the other male [was] able to subdue the two women until police arrived and took them into custody.”

The account on the same day by the Salt Lake Tribune was more lucid:


Please respect our Commenting Policy