To the Washington Post copy desk:
I know it’s a really busy day, with the blizzard blowing in and all, but I wanted to make sure that your received a copy of the following letter from a strategic leader of the American Baptist Churches/USA. I think I received at least three copies of it by email yesterday and it seems that it was sent to news organizations across the nation.
Then again, I’m a journalist who specializes in covering religion news. People send me things like this all the time.
The wording in this online version focuses on broadcast journalism, although I could have sworn that I received a neutral or print version.
Dear Sir or Madam:
As I watched your report of the Baptists arrested for suspicion of kidnapping the children, I was concerned about mis-communication in your report. While the people involved are Baptists from the United States, they are not American Baptists, a title belonging to the churches who are part of the American Baptist Churches/USA based in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. Please correct this in future broadcasts.
The American Baptist Churches/USA are very involved in earthquake relief through our partnerships in Haiti as well as through our missionaries there. We do not want any misunderstanding of our work.
Sincerely,
Ruth Clark
President, Board of International Ministries
I hope that this letter is helpful. Words matter, on the religion beat — kind of like politics, or sports, or the food page.
Sincerely,
Terry Mattingly
GetReligion.org
I realize by now that many GetReligion readers really do not care about this picky little journalism issue. However, the American Baptists care about it and that’s enough for me. There are plenty of ways to get around this particular issue in news style while writing stories about the now infamous Southern Baptists from Idaho.
You think? Alas, here’s the latest from the Post:
PORT-AU-PRINCE, HAITI — Ten American Baptists who said they wanted to save orphans after Haiti’s earthquake were charged with child kidnapping Thursday in a case that has raised fears about the trafficking of minors.
The Americans, most of whom belong to a Baptist church in Idaho, were arrested last week after they tried to enter the Dominican Republic in a bus loaded with 33 children, ages 2 to 12. The group’s attorney here in Port-au-Prince, Edwin Coq, told reporters that nine of his 10 clients had little idea what they were doing.
Note, please, the “American Baptist” wording is still in the lede. Note, also, the missed opportunity to simply add the word “Southern” in front of the words “Baptist church” at the start of the second paragraph.
Nowhere in the article is there a word — zero, zip, nada — that tells readers anything about the denominational affiliation of this ill-fated mission project. Then again, that might require explaining that, while this group is from a Southern Baptist congregation, it was acting totally on its own, not in cooperation with foreign missions efforts planned by the Southern Baptist Convention (the nation’s second largest religious group, after the Catholic Church). It might require explaining something about how Baptists work.
How did another major news organization open a similar update on this story? Let’s try the New York Times:
PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — Ten Americans who tried to take 33 Haitian children out of the country last week without the government’s consent have been charged with child abduction and criminal conspiracy, as Haitian officials sought to reassert judicial control after the Jan. 12 earthquake.
The Americans, most of them members of a Baptist congregation from Idaho, had said they intended to rescue Haitian children left parentless in the quake and take them to what they described as an orphanage across the border in the Dominican Republic. But they acknowledged failing to seek approval to remove the children from Haiti, and several of the children have at least one living parent.
This story contains all kinds of new information on the case and, as in previous efforts, the Times has been talking to Haitians and focusing on other trends that have helped turn this case into an international incident.
It’s also interesting — note the video at the top of this post — that some journalists have discovered that there are Haitian religious leaders linked to this story. In fact, the Baptists from Idaho claim that Haitian pastors and former Haitians made most of the arrangements that set this train wreck in motion. So far, however, I have seen no evidence of legal authorities focusing on the Haitian connections. Clearly, this story is not going away anytime soon.
The Times report ends with yet another wrinkle in the case, yet another reason for making a capital case out of the misadventures of this independent Baptist group:
One expert said that by pursuing the case Haitian authorities seemed to be trying to make a point.
“Haiti’s decision to prosecute the Baptist missionaries may be motivated, in part, by the need to show its own people and the world that it is a viable entity that is tackling the grave problem of international child abductions in Haiti,” Christopher J. Schmidt, a lawyer with Bryan Cave L.L.P. in St. Louis who has been involved in multiple cases of international kidnapping, said in a statement.
An American expert said that. I wonder what people think in Haiti?
 | Posted at 5:23 pm |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (13) |
February 5, 2010, at 7:02 pm
This story is spawning other, related stories. One that I read from a very different perspective shows how other have approached Haitian children:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/tacoma/24hour/religion/story/1056090.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 5, 2010, at 8:58 pm
Interesting letter from the American Baptists. Says something about the state of Baptists life in the US that their main concern is distancing themselves from the arrested Baptists.
Odd though, that they’d claim to own the words “American Baptists,” especially in this context— where the status of the Idaho group as Americans is far more central than their status as Baptists. It makes in the Post story, written by a Post foreign correspondent, would refer to them as American Baptists—and then use “Americans” throughout the rest of the piece.
You can make a legitimate case as a journalist for using “American Baptists” in the Post story, especially as it is basically a diplomatic/foreign policy story, about the status of arrested American citizens. The Post can care about journalism and still come to a different conclusion about the best way to describe this group than a religion writer would.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 5, 2010, at 9:04 pm
Terry—
Another copy editing question for you. Should this group be referred to as “missionaries” as the AP has been calling them? I’m not sure that’s an accurate term.
In fact, the church where half the team are members says they are not missionaries.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 5, 2010, at 9:33 pm
In Baptist circles, isn’t short-term missionaries still the common phrase for mission teams of this kind? That’s what I remember.
Bob, there is no need for the confusion of the term American Baptists. There are dozens of ways to say that, as the Times and others have shown. In fact, almost everyone OTHER than the Post.
Here we go again. To use the Poynter term, I see nothing to be gained here, in journalism content, by offending the STAKEHOLDERS.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 5, 2010, at 10:11 pm
With disaster relief, it’s been more common to call them volunteers or team members, than missionaries.
On the Post using “American Baptists,” both Post articles you’ve linked to were written by Juan Forero, a foreign correspondent who covers Colombia and Venezuela for the post, and former Bogato bureau chief for the NY Times. Not someone who likely is well-versed in the details of Baptist life in the U.S. Which likely explains why he’s used that term.
You make a good point about the downside of using “American Baptist” — there are several better terms to use in referring to the group.
However, it’s not just the Post that’s used “American Baptist.” The AP used the term in their headlines and ledes in stories about the Idaho group.
Now AP is calling them “U.S. Missionaries,” which I think might be worse—considering that most Southern Baptist missionaries (and disaster relief volunteers) go through extensive training, and are warned about following proper procedures.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 5, 2010, at 10:54 pm
FYI: Juan Forero is an American of, I believe, Colombian heritage. He worked for many years at the Newark Star-Ledger (a Newhouse paper; I met him when I was at RNS, also a Newhouse property) prior to the Times. I recall him doing many stories about Baptist/evangelical/Pentecostal storefront Hispanic church life in the NY-NJ area. So, Bob, I’m guessing he knows at least the opening verse of Baptist life.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 5, 2010, at 11:18 pm
I second Bob’s call on “missionaries” vs. “volunteers/team members.” In my experience, in evangelical churches the term “missionary” is usually reserved for someone who is working full time with a missions agency or church organization.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 5, 2010, at 11:38 pm
Hi Ira:
The Post’s bio lists Forero as a native of Bogato, but does mention his work in Newark and San Diego. I was trying to point out that as foreign correspondent, he’s not necessarily well versed with the nuances of Baptist life in the US.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 6, 2010, at 12:04 am
Bob,
I don’t think we know that their “main” concern is about “distancing themselves from the arrested Baptists.”
We only know that they were concerned enough about it to notify copydesks. I don’t think we can judge their motivations or know where that concern ranks among other concerns. Perhaps their other concerns — both larger and smaller — are not the type that they would share with copydesks.
I try to clarify that Missouri-Synod Lutherans aren’t Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Lutherans whenever the confusion arises in media reports, regardless of whether I agree or disagree with the issue in question. It’s a concern of mine but in the vast scheme of things I have larger and smaller concerns, too.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 6, 2010, at 8:31 am
Given that the letter came specifically from their Board of International Missions, as opposed to some other office, I think Bob’s observation that they want to distance themselves from the alleged child traffickers is more than fair.
I also agree the use of missionary is more problematic than the terms “American Baptists” which probably leads to little confusion for the vast majority of readers. In contrast, calling them “missionaries” misrepresents who they are and causes significant confusion for almost all readers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 6, 2010, at 9:00 am
The detainees were most emphatically *not* missionaries: they are individual church members on a self-proclaimed mission: big difference. I agree with Peter that’s much more egregious a mis-statement than “American Baptists”—although I also agree with tmatt that it can be misconstrued as referring to “the” American Baptists. (Did their press release not include examples of their own good works, and contacts both on the ground and in the US? If so, an opportunity wasted!)
As for looking for the Americans’ Haitian contacts/connections: so far the NYTs at least has not been able to locate any—sorry I can’t seem to locate the link to that story, I think it was Thursday. Why wouldn’t the local ministers/contacts be available to help the detainees out of this mess?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 6, 2010, at 10:48 am
OK, I did some searching and it seems that the normal term is that they are people on “short-term missions.” I am more than willing to concede that point.
However, on “American Baptists” I simply think that there is no reason to be inaccurate when it is easy to be accurate.
With the church in Idaho, I can totally understand American Baptist executives wanting the world to know that it is a Southern Baptist Convention church. Period.
There is no journalist argument for the improper identification of a group when it is easy to do it accurately.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 7, 2010, at 10:22 pm
Terry,
I agree that American Baptist is not the most precise term when describing this group. That doesn’t make it wrong.
They are Baptists from America, so they’re American Baptists, just like a group of National Baptists, if they’d been arrested would be American Baptists. Or Free Will Baptists. Or Independent Fundamentalist Baptists. Or Primitive Baptists.
The problem with the Ruth Clark’s letter is that she’s claiming some kind of proprietary use of the term “American Baptists” for the American Baptist Churches/USA— is that it leaves out, for starters, the American Baptist Association
.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0