Ed Condon

, , , , , , , , ,

Thinking about funding real online news: The following is not a promo for The Pillar

, , , , , , , , ,
Thinking about funding real online news: The following is not a promo for The Pillar

Let me stress something right up front.

The following is not a fundraising effort for The Pillar, the alternative Catholic news source that I think (and I believe Clemente Lisi is raising his hand as well) has become a must-read item in this age of crazy Catholic news events and trends. OK, news that is even crazier than NORMAL on that front.

We all struggle, in this age in which the Internet has debundled our news world and readers who really care about specific subjects — think Catholic news — have myriad options to choose from. The problem is figuring out which ones to support with, you know, money.

How many Substack options does one reader have the time to read? How many can said reader wave a credit card at, month after month?

Anyway, this week I received an email missive from The Pillar — “This is all a choice” — that was clearly a reminder to readers about the factors of time and money that I just mentioned.

But it was also a meditation by Ed Condon on one of the most painful realities in our splinted, niche-media world. Repeat after me: News is expensive. Opinion is cheap.

Thus, I want to point readers to sections of this letter that were valid “think piece” material for news-consumers who care about the digital religion beat. The “JD” is, of course, a reference to scribe J.D. Flynn.

Let’s start with a news event. Try to guess which one:

After the news first surfaced on an Italian site, a lot of people called, texted, and emailed us to ask what was going on, and if we were going to cover it. It took us a few hours to confirm things with our own sources, and the story made it into JD’s newsletter yesterday. 

But as more outlets were picking up the story, one American cleric told us that he simply couldn’t be sure it was true until he read it on The Pillar. 

That kind of feedback means a lot. It’s a confirmation of what we want The Pillar to be all about and how we want it to work. We don’t ever want to write something you could read somewhere else, or worse just repeat what someone else has said they heard. 

If you read it at The Pillar, it matters to us that you know it's true because you know we did the legwork to make sure of the facts — no matter if everyone else is already talking about some version of it, or no one else has got the story at all.


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

Adding a few sources for those post-midterms thumbsuckers on the religion beat

, , , , , , , , , ,
Adding a few sources for those post-midterms thumbsuckers on the religion beat

When the dust has (thankfully) settled following Election Day, writers on politics, and on religion, and on religion-and-politics, will be analyzing what it all means for the future direction of U.S. culture.

Some matters on the agenda:

* Are the results a fluke, or a trend? What do they signal about 2024? Is the “religious right” a growing or receding force? How will the expected Trump 2024 campaign affect evangelicalism? What will Trumpism be post-Trump? Did the abortion issue hurt Republicans? Did religious liberty issues hurt Democrats? How do moral concerns shape inflation? Immigration? Crime? Ukraine?

* Then factions. What’s going on with the pivotal white Catholics? And Hispanic Catholics? Can Republicans ever make inroads among Black Protestants? Did religiously interesting new figures emerge among the Republicans’ record number of minority candidates?

* Here is a growing niche that should get its own sidebar: How crucial are non-religious voters for Democrats’ prospects?

* Oh, and how should journalists define “Christian nationalism” and how influential is that crowd anyway?

* And whatever else develops.

Specialists will be familiar with ReligionLink, a valuable service of the Religion News Association that, among other features, posts periodic memos on a specific topic in the news, providing detailed background, links to articles and proposed sources. Subscribe for free here.

Its October 18 posting laid out he midterm elections, listing no less than 76 background items from varied media and 25 expert sources. This material will remain just as useful for those post-election analyses next week and beyond.


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

As Roe clock ticks, press avoids news about another big story -- attacks on Catholic churches

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
As Roe clock ticks, press avoids news about another big story -- attacks on Catholic churches

There have been at least 41 incidents of attacks against churches and crisis-pregnancy facilities since the May 2 leak of the Supreme Court draft decision that revealed the potential fall of Roe v. Wade.

The attacks have included property theft, vandalism, arson and property destruction.

How do we know this? A front page New York Times investigation this past Sunday?

No.

A round-up story in The Washington Post, USA Today, the Associated Press? Coverage on CBS, CNN or another major network?

No, no, no and, alas, no.

We know this because of The Washington Stand, which is described as the Family Research Council’s “outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview.” In other words, these events are “conservative” niche news (as opposed to, let’s say, attacks on “sanctuary movement” churches because of their activism on immigration).

This awful trend should come as no surprise. At least it wasn’t to me. I wrote a story recently at Religion Unplugged on the rash of vandalism — especially acts against Catholic churches — throughout this spring. I opened my news account with the theft of a tabernacle at a Brooklyn, N.Y., church (see this related GetReligion piece). Here’s an excerpt from my piece:

The desecration was the latest in a string of incidents across the United States, triggering fears of future vandalism given the supercharged political climate around abortion, LGBTQ rights and bishops denying politicians Communion.

The vandalism may not necessarily be tied to one or more of these factors — rising crime rates is also a possibility in the wake of the pandemic — but church officials remain vigilant as the summer approaches. While the motivations remain a mystery, the outcome has rattled Catholic churches across the country. Some have resorted to increased security measures, like locking doors when Masses aren’t taking place, installing security cameras and even erecting barbed wire and fences to avoid being targeted.

As we await a final Supreme Court ruling, we could be in for a long summer of violence and vandalism.

My criticism here is not in the news coverage this issue has received. Instead, it’s the lack of coverage.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Vatican game that never ends: Knowns and unknowns with covering next papal election

, , , , , ,
Vatican game that never ends: Knowns and unknowns with covering next papal election

It might seem ghoulish to outsiders, but the media have a duty to closely monitor news personalities’ retirement plans, health woes, aging processes and impending deaths, whether that of a British queen, U.S. president, Supreme Court justices, tycoons or even Hollywood superstars.

Or a pontiff.

Currently, there’s a season of speculation about Pope Francis’s future and whether his newly chosen cardinals to be installed August 27 are his final bid to shape the conclave that will elect the next pope.

Careful. If you figure he’s making sure it will be a fellow liberal, don’t forget that the conservative Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI named the cardinals who elected Francis.

Speaking of successors, AP Correspondent Nicole Winfield follows the Rome bureau’s legendary Victor Simpson, who covered four popes across 41 years. On Sunday, she knowledgeably sifted some Francis scenarios.

Francis has just announced that when the cardinals gather in August he’ll visit the Italian hometown of Celestine V, the pope who famously resigned in A.D. 1294.

Surprisingly, Benedict did the same in 2013. So, is this trip a signal, or only a trip? Francis has remarked that Benedict was “opening the door” for resignation by future popes, hinting he might consider the idea. But Vaticanologists figure Francis will not resign so long as another ex-pope is alive.

At age 95, Benedict is alert but frail. Francis, age 85, appears reasonably healthy but underwent colon surgery last year and recently appeared in public in a wheelchair for the first time due to chronic knee pain.

Then there’s this. The cardinals elected Francis partly in hopes he’d reform the perpetually troubled Roman Curia (as in the sprawling Vatican bureaucracy). Restructure is now set in a Francis edict that took effect on Sunday. But fully implementing the scheme may be thorny and Francis may feel a responsibility to pursue his project.

Surveying the batch of incoming cardinal electors, Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego stands out as the only American and as a mere bishop, not an archbishop (see this tmatt “On Religion” column about this drama). Francis again snubbed nearby Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez, the Mexico-born head of the nation’s largest archdiocese and the elected president of the U.S. bishops. Did membership in the Opus Dei organization count against him?


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

Catholic news site proving to be a 'Pillar' when it comes to religion journalism

, , , , , , , , , ,
Catholic news site proving to be a 'Pillar' when it comes to religion journalism

I teach journalism at The King’s College in New York City. I have for the past four years. GetReligion readers may recall that tmatt used to teach there, as well.

Among the many classes I enjoy teaching is one called “Entrepreneurial Journalism and the Future.” It is a class that teaches aspiring journalists the importance of the business side of the profession and how technology has disrupted the traditional distribution methods by which people consume news.

We all know that the number of people who read a daily newspaper — in paper form that is — has dropped dramatically over the last decade as more people use iPads and smartphones to connect to information. The news ecosystem has grown to envelope legacy news organizations such as The New York Times and Washington Post to digital-only sites like Buzzfeed and Vice.

The Catholic news world has also seen its share of startups since the internet has changed the news industry. It’s these changes that have brought more issues like fake news and misinformation, but also allowed journalists to become entrepreneurs and build start-ups of their own.

Journalists have found news and innovative ways — like the growing subscription platform Substack — to tell stories and do great journalism.

One of the bright spots of 2021 so far has been The Pillar. Founded by journalists (and canon lawyers) J.D. Flynn and Ed Condon who have experience at a variety of places like Catholic News Agency, The Pillar says its “a Catholic media project focused on smart, faithful, and serious journalism, from committed and informed Catholics who love the Church.”

This is what else they claim to be:

Our focus is on investigative journalism, which is how we’ll spend most of our time. We think investigating stories that matter can help the Church to better serve its sacred mission, the salvation of souls.


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

Catholic journalists are must-read sources for those seeking reality of Cuomo scandals

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Catholic journalists are must-read sources for those seeking reality of Cuomo scandals

It was just two months ago, in the aftermath of the U.S. Capitol riot, that an idea was floated that could help stop all the misinformation in our society: a “reality czar.”

It was a New York Times piece by tech columnist Kevin Roose (his new book “Futureproof” is a must read if you’re interested in automation replacing you at work) on Feb. 2 that quoted experts who floated ideas to stop what the paper called the “scourge of hoaxes and lies.”

Roose’s piece threw out some interesting solutions — although “reality czar” is Orwellian, a Soviet-style solution to misinformation.

The harsh reality is that news consumers will need to read a wider variety of news sources if they are interested in finding solid facts, on-the-record sources and some sense of balanced reporting. On issues linked to religion, culture and politics, that will mean paying more attention to independent religious publications — including Catholic websites — that are now punching way above their weight. Hold that thought, because we will come back to it.

The truth is reality used to be what journalism purported to report on.

That’s no longer true given how polarized the news media has become over the past decade, a progression that sped up during the Donald Trump years and following the proliferation of partisan news sources during the internet age.

From a political standpoint, this brand of one-sided journalism has allowed politicians to earn cover from many mainstream newsrooms for alleged wrongdoings. On the left, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, embroiled in dual scandals regarding nursing home deaths during COVID-19 and growing claims of sexual harassment, is a prime example of this phenomena.

At this time last year, professionals at news organizations were fawning all over his press conferences as the country plunged into the pandemic. Many journalists considered Cuomo the coronavirus reality czar.

Why? Cuomo, a Democrat, served as the counterweight to then-President Trump.


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

Background for journalists: Will the Catholic church excommunicate Cuomo over abortion law?

, , , , , , ,

Politics and religion have come into conflict once again after Roman Catholic conservatives called for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to be excommunicated, splitting the church’s hierarchy on how to deal with politicians who further an agenda contrary to the Vatican’s teachings.

The call came after Cuomo signed into state law a measure that expanded abortion rights across the state. After passing the Senate, a chamber newly-controlled by Democrats after this past November’s elections, on Jan. 22, Cuomo signed the Reproductive Health Act. The law codifies the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling to allow abortion in the event the Supreme Court were to overturn it in the future – something Democrats fear could occur in the next few years.

The law takes the Supreme Court ruling to new levels. It allows an abortion to take place up to the day of birth. The law also says that if a baby survives an abortion, a doctor is not required to save the baby’s life. In addition, a doctor’s assistant can perform a surgical abortions.

Within hours of its signing, Cuomo, also a Democrat, ordered that One World Trade Center be lit in pink in celebration. Anti-aboriton advocates across the country were swift in their condemnation. New York’s Cardinal Timothy Dolan — along with the Catholic bishops across the state — signed a letter condemning the bill, adding that “our beloved state has become a more dangerous one for women and their unborn babies.”

Days later, he backed off the excommunication word (Cuomo is a Catholic who is divorced and lives with his longtime girlfriend), while many voices on the right called the new law “infanticide.”

Dolan joined the excommunication fray, saying a week later during an appearance on Fox News Channel that such a move “would be counterproductive.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy