I hadn’t really been following the news about the congregation in Florida that plans to burn a Quran. Gen. David Petraeus weighed in against the plan and it’s receiving a lot of coverage in countries with predominately Muslim populations. This picture is of a protest in Kabul. In fact, it’s downright surprising how much coverage this story has received considering that this is a tiny congregation. Of course, in the day and age of Westoboro-media-paloozas, I shouldn’t be surprised …
First Things has a post on the topic that’s really about whether we make claims for God that are our own, but the way it began made me wonder about the media coverage:
Although it is only September, I think it is safe to say that the “Burn a Koran” day is the pseudo-event of the year. Despite being completely insignificant, the fifty member Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida has managed—thanks to the media—to get worldwide exposure for their book-burning. Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, even weighed in, saying, “It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.”
I have two lines of questions for GetReligion readers. First, do you think that the coverage this church has received has been fair? Why or why not?
And my other question is whether you think it’s appropriate that this church has received this much coverage. And why do you think it’s received so much coverage?
I asked a veteran Godbeat reporter for his thoughts. He hasn’t covered the topic … yet. But he had some excellent thoughts. Here’s a snippet:
Even if every [mainstream media outlet] ignored them, their words and images would be promulgated by friends and enemies via the Internet. You know Jones will have his burning on YouTube, where it will be widely passed around by Taliban, al Quaeda, etc.
Best we actual journalists can try to do is to provide context, dispel ignorance.
I think it’s true — this is news, whether you like it or not. A topic should rarely — if ever — be censored by the media. The question is really about how we cover it. In that light, I just saw this “breaking” report from CBS News, which begins:
Terry Jones, the controversial pastor behind the recent call to burn copies of the Quran on Sept. 11, runs a church that spends most of its money on administrative expenses and operates a furniture business out his church in Gainesville, FL.
According to the 2006 tax return—-the most recent tax return available on Guidestar.org—-filed by Jones’ church, the Dove World Outreach Center, “program services” accounted for 30.5 percent of the church’s expenses, while “Administrative costs” accounted for 69.5 percent.
Interesting how quickly the media have investigated the folks behind this tiny church in Florida, particularly in light of the coverage of the mosque project near ground zero, also facing financial trouble. Not that financial angles are what I’d encourage reporters to explore.
So how do you think these stories could best be covered? Are there appropriate and inappropriate angles? What are your examples of best and worst coverage?
 | Posted at 5:03 pm |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (35) |
September 7, 2010, at 5:21 pm
The most important information I think journalists should include is that the penalty for desecrating a Quran is death in the Islamic justice system. And that the Quran places the obligation to carry this out on individual Muslims rather than a religious authority structure. Quote the verses in the Quran. Interview Muslims about this.
An interesting follow up would look at the Organization for the Islamic Conference efforts to get the UN to pass resolutions against defamation of religion.
Also interesting to interview constitutional law scholars and scholars of Islamic Law to compare and contrast our First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and religion conflict with Sharia Law.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 5:44 pm
The amount of coverage is the same, sad story: the sensational sells.
I agree with the unnamed veteran Godbeat reporter’s analysis - being reported in the media is not that meaningful in today’s internet age. As we’ve seen over and over again, outright lies such as spread about President Obama are believed by people want to believe them no matter what the media reports.
Also, I think it’s important to highlight General Petraeus’s comment about their giving aid and comfort to the enemy. One thing that we should see reported on is the symmetry about how this isolated act by a small minority calling themselves Christians resonates in the Islamic world just as the act by a small minority of Muslims resonated in the US on 9/11. And we should see noted how such perceptions are part of the current toxic informational atmosphere along with the outright lies that are currently taken as truth by too many.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 5:57 pm
Does “refusing/declining to cover” count as “censoring”? I’m not being flip; you seem to have used the word “censored” on purpose here.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 5:57 pm
I say “Amen” to Jerry.
Real journalism in this day and age is all about providing context — although whether our English-language stories ever get through to people who may not be literate in their native tongue of, say, Urdu, is another question. I think it’s important to point out the difference between the leader of a small, independent congregation and someone who commands significant respect and a following in the wider Christian world. I think that the guy’s questionable financial practices are entirely pertinent if he is, as I suspect, using this Quran-burning as a fundraising device for his church.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 6:28 pm
When a tiny group like this perpetrates what is very obviously a publicity stunt, then yes, it’s fair game if the journalists start digging into the background and pulling out any dirty laundry.
Live by the sword, die by the sword (if that’s not too bad an analogy in the circumstances) but I do think that Quran burning (or burning Harry Potter books, or books by the Pope, or whomever you like) is just nonsense and if you’ve got an eye on publicity like that, then you deserve to be put under the spotlight.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 6:39 pm
Yes, I agree with Martha that Jerry’s point is interesting: burning the Quran is seen by many Muslims as comparably offense to highjacking planes, destroying billions in assets and thousands of lives.
I would question equating them both as “small groups”. Bin Laden had millions to expend, set up training camps, international scope, etc. These Florida Dove people are using part of their space to sell used furniture on eBay to fund their small operations. I think just Bin Laden’s wives and children added up to the total membership of the Florida Dove group.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 7:24 pm
Martha: “I do think that Quran burning (or burning Harry Potter books, or books by the Pope, or whomever you like) is just nonsense and if you’ve got an eye on publicity like that, then you deserve to be put under the spotlight.”
Seriously, is there any point in burning the Koran secretly without an eye on publicity?!?
And how is this Koran burning any less sensible then the burning of the Papal Bull Exsurge Domine, the Decretals of Clement VI, the Summa Angelica, the Chrysposus of Dr. Eck, and other Romanist documents on December 10, 1520, at Wittenberg by Dr. Martin Luther, who was then excommunicated by the pope on January 3rd, and placed under an imperial ban, whereupon a person could rob, injure or kill Luther without legal consequences?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 8:31 pm
Clearly the minister has a right to burn the Koran. Clearly Moslems have the right to build the mosque near Ground Zero. In both cases the question is “Should they exercise those rights?”
How about some journalist or columnist suggesting that someone get the minister to NOT exercise his right, if the mosque builders will NOT exercise their rights. It will be interesting to see how the media and the Moslem world react when a clear way to protect the Korans from fire is broached.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 9:27 pm
I doubt that as a true Christian, one that is grounded in the Three Virtues, would never burn someone else’s religious material. This book burning is not for the better good, but for the mostly bad. I’m certain that the burning will not go over well in the Muslim community. Muslim’s are very versed in the eye for an eye routine, and they will get back at the pastor—this is a microcosm of what is going on in the mid-east, when someone lobs a missile into Israel and Israel answers with a airstrike from a jet, is this escalation? You bet it is. At some point you need to step back and take a big breath and think about consequences of your actions, this would be a good time to do it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 11:43 pm
And no matter how this is covered, if this group follows through with the planned burnings, are they taking any responsibility for what happens to the minority Christian community in the Muslim majority countries?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 11:53 pm
I am unconvinced a group of 50 people doing anything to a book is ever newsworthy, especially when it is just one copy of the book.
That said, as I pointed out in a comment on another recent discussion here the Qu’ran is not the Muslim Bible. It is God enverbiate, or at least the earthly manifestation of God’s complete, holy word. It is literally a sacred book while the Bible contains the words of God and his prophets, but lacks the sacredness in and of itself that is had by the Qu’ran.
What really intrigues me though is, if these people were to burn an English “translation” of the Qu’ran would the Muslims be mad? Also, why does a planned burning of the Qu’ran rate more attention that actually burnings in effigy?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 7, 2010, at 11:59 pm
Kris D,
Why do the Muslims get to blame other people for their killing sprees? Or do you think people who attacked Muslims in the wake of September 11th can blame their actions on the hijackers?
Mistreatment of Christians in countries like Pakistan is constant and does not relate to outside events. Come to think of it the Sunnis and Shi’ites attack each other so much in Pakistan, that everybody gets attacked for their religion once in a while.
The possible Qu’ran burners no more have the blood of people who get killed by angry mobs in Palestine on their hands than the 9/11 hijakers have the blood of the Sikh who was killed by someone who thought the Sikh was a Muslim on their hands.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 12:06 am
I think the administrative cost angle is the worst ever.
This is all the more odd in light of the failure to explore finances in the Park 51 project issue. The fact of the matter is that there have been large amounts of money syphoned from Muslims in the US to support terrorists in the Middle East.
One of the financial backers of Park 51 gave to a group that was later shut down as a Hamas front. The coverage I have seen has said “lots of people gave to this group thinking it was a real charity”. However there have been some groups exposed in the past for telling one story in English and another in Arabic. I actually first heard of this years ago on NPR, but more recently it seems that this issue is ignored by the MSM.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 8:12 am
The US Code provides that it is illegal to burn the flag, but the U.S. Supreme Court has held, several times, that burning the flag is a protected form of speech. For years, Liberals and Democrats have had NO PROBLEM with burning the U.S. flag anywhere. anytime. PERIOD.
Which is why burning the KORAN is an expression of FREE SPEECH. What must be allowed by patriots who hate seeing the U.S. flag burning by pro-Islam supporters means pro-Islam supporters must ACCEPT that OTHERS have the SAME RIGHTS TO BURN AS MANY KORANS AS THEY WANT.
By the way, liberals and democrats, if Muslims were burning bibles, would you all be in such an UPROAR? I think NOT! And if Bibles were being burned by Muslims, how many CHRISTIANS WOULD BE THREATENING HARM and MURDER TO THOSE who were Muslims? Muslims who threaten others’ lives are SHOWING Clearly what their religion IS REALLY ABOUT!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 8:41 am
I think it would be interesting to compare this to the coverage of other, similar occurrences. How does the coverage match that given to things like the infamous piss-Christ, or the dung on Mary? How does it measure against coverage of flag burnings and other protests that have long been a staple in the Islamic world? Who is presented as the baddie? Is anyone? The coverage here has been mostly negative. Some have continued to compare it to what was done on 9/11 (am I the only one who sees a slight difference in what he is doing and what the 9/11 hijackers did?). Is that how the press acted toward those who defaced Christian symbols? Is that how other countries that have sported sometimes violent protests against America have been covered? I don’t have access to media archives, but it would be interesting to compare.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 9:54 am
Honestly, Mollie, I was shocked by your casual-sounding aside,
Why on earth not? It seems to me that this context is extremely important. The fact that the Christian congregation is extremely small and the projected Park51 is extremely expensive are both essential bits of context. And if either group were shown to be receiving significant support from hate groups with terrorist connections, it would change the discussion dramatically.
In contrast, the conversations that get more coverage seem to amount to little more than dueling opinions. There is a pretty general agreement that both groups have the legal right to do what they intend, and the rest is simply an argument over whether they should. That is interesting enough, as are — for example — the theological positions of the religious leaders in question. But I for one am far more interested in where the money comes from and goes to.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 10:03 am
Rev. Michael Church,
I’m just saying I think there are more important angles to explore. But it can certainly be fruitful. In fact, some of my favorite religion stories have been financial investigations. Let me put it this way — I’ve worried about how we want to investigate one group’s finances but not another’s. But clearly this doesn’t mean that all financial investigations are bad.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 10:25 am
Yes. They have proposed an action that a majority finds distasteful and a hefty minority finds outrageous. For better or worse, that’s news.
I think it’s appropriate because I’ve learned something new in each iteration of coverage. It think it’s gotten so much coverage for the reasons Petraeus covered: It’s a small act with the potential of huge consequences.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 11:06 am
To John Pack Lambert:
I’m not saying that certain Muslims “get” to blame, I’m saying that they will lunge at any perceived justification to blame. This may not be rational, but it’s the way it is. After all, it was Muslims that were killed in riots over the Mohammed cartoons. Not that it makes any sense, just the way it is.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 11:11 am
Don’t burn it. Learn something about it! Qur’an Reading Day 9/11
Join the event on Facebook, Everywhere USA
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=145498728818520
Sign up to pledge to read from the Qur’an this September 11 as an act of solidarity with your Muslim brothers and sisters around the world. Not to take away from the solemn dignity that all people deserve who were affected by the horrific violence of terrorists that day, but take at least a moment to learn something new about a world tradition that has given us all so much, and to counter the awful sentiments of hatred and ignorance that can drag any of us down if we aren’t careful.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 11:39 am
MC: The fact that it’s free speech doesn’t mean that you can do it without being a jerk.
The main article that I’ve read on this was on CNN.com, and I was relieved that it got into Jones’ motivations for burning the Qur’an. They were buried toward the end, but they existed. I wasn’t sure if this was purely geared toward making a statement, or if it was supposed to be some kind of symbolic exorcism (I’ve heard of book-burnings that were intended to weaken the demonic influence of the book on its readers). It’s an important distinction, because if it were a symbolic exorcism, Jones would have reason to think he was doing some real spiritual good. But, no, it looks like pure publicity.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 1:01 pm
Was cleaning out my inbox and just found this, from the Council on American Islamic Relations, regarding responsible journalistic coverage of the Quran burning. It goes out to journalists all over the world, including the Islamic world:
“Just as all Muslims should not be blamed for the actions of a few extremists, neither should all Christians or all Americans be blamed for the intentionally offensive actions of the Dove World Outreach Center,” said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad. “Pastor Terry Jones represents nothing but an extremist fringe.”
He said the Dove World Outreach Center is only seeking cheap publicity and does not represent mainstream Christianity.
“Media professionals have a responsibility to put this publicity stunt in its proper context in their reports and commentaries,” said Awad.
CAIR this week distributed a television public service announcement (PSA) that implicitly challenges the Quran burnings.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 1:29 pm
I’d be a lot more impressed with the Council on American Islamic Relations if they put more emphasis on criticizing threats of violence and the actual potential violent response to the planned Quran burning. CAIR continues to avoid directly addressing the problem of Muslim violence and its relationship to the actual words in the Quran.
I’m not supporting the Quran burning, but it sure brings to public consciousness our fear of Muslim violence and awareness of the roots of the violence in the Quran itself. And the self censorship we follow to avoid Muslim violence. Time to re-read Hitchen’s great piece on the 20th anniversary of the Rushdie fatwa, Assassins of the Mind.
I also like this recent article by the authors of the forthcoming Oxford University Press book Silenced on contemporary blasphemy rules.
It’s like we are living in a run down neighborhood with violent thugs on the street who will beat us up if we dis them, so we constantly be on guard and make obsequious shows of respect to avoid being attacked.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 1:36 pm
There are two aspects that should be considered:
1. The image of “ignorant book burner” is a deeply set secular stereotype of those they refer to as ‘fundamentalists.’ One of the reasons a story like this gets covered is because it so resonates with the view the reporter has of the story’s subject. People love events and images that confirm their presuppositions. “They burn books because they cannot face what is written in them. See, they testify to the falsehood of that which they advocate.”
2. The only reason this is a story is the expected reaction in the Muslim world. We have an insignificant group performing an insignificant act that would otherwise pass unnoticed. But because Muslims will hear about this story (albeit in some distorted form due to the agency of an interested party that desires an angry reaction), and Muslims are presumed to react violently to such stories, suddenly we have a controversy. Let’s summarize the story, shall we? “Group of ignorant Christian fundamentalist book-burners (who accurately represent the true face of Christian fundamentalism whether they will admit it or not - insert images from Nazi Germany here) provokes angry reaction from Muslim fundamentalists, and get people killed - especially US Servicemen.” What in that story is there for a secular journalist not to like?
carl
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 1:42 pm
Sign up to pledge to read from the Qur’an this September 11 as an act of solidarity with your Muslim brothers and sisters around the world.
Fair enough, as long as, in keeping with our approach to studying Christianity, we look at the bad and the good, not just the good.
I’d be a lot more impressed with the Council on American Islamic Relations if they put more emphasis on criticizing threats of violence and the actual potential violent response to the planned Quran burning.
Yep.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 4:42 pm
What are these Three Virtues?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 5:37 pm
My guess would be faith, hope, and love.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 6:22 pm
Faith Hope and Charity, Charity being the most important.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 8, 2010, at 6:32 pm
Dave G. makes a very important and overlooked point about media coverage. When The Blessed Virgin was dobbed in dung and Christ Crucified was given a piss bath—with government involvement, as I recall—the overall media hysteria was directed against those who found that art disgusting and revolting and who strongly objected to being coerced and unwilling participants in the gross blasphemy through our taxes.
Now, the overall media hysteria is in the other direction. Are they upset that government funds aren’t being used for the bonfire??? Or is the hysteria because we have become used to groveling to the constant threatened violence from one group or another of Moslems when they are upset.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 9, 2010, at 10:42 am
I agree with the claim that Koran burning is news, whether we like it or not, but we have to recognize some sort of limit.
That thousands of stories have been written on such a small congregation is beyond absurd, and media are complicit in the absurdity. Howard Kurtz has a very nice piece to this effect today over at the Washington Post.
It is important to have Dove’s ideas accurately reported on the record, and there is a legitimate free-speech vs. religious-defamation debate buried in the story that also deserves media attention.
But the actions of the church itself are garnering far more coverage that goes far beyond what they merit. It’s become gratuitous.
I insist that it’s high time journalists orphan the story.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 9, 2010, at 12:55 pm
I don’t understand. Are we not supposed to follow the teachings of our peaceful savior, seeking peace and not agitating others? When it comes to the bumper sticker “What would Jesus do?” somehow burning the Quran does not come to mind. To end the madness, we need to promote peace and love - it does catch on.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 9, 2010, at 1:45 pm
Hi Patricia,
I’m not advocating the book burning. But it occurs to me a case could be made for the pastor based on the verses in the Quran that say people who believe Jesus Christ is Lord are blasphemers, will burn in Hell, etc. I’m surprised I haven’t seen that in any of the news articles.
For example:
Sura 5:51 “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.”
Sura 9:30 “The Jews said, “Ezra is the son of Allah,” while the Christians said, “Jesus is the son of Allah!” These are blasphemies uttered by their mouths. They thus match the blasphemies of those who have disbelieved in the past. Allah condemns them. They have surely deviated. They have set up their religious leaders and scholars as lords, instead of Allah. Others deified the Messiah, son of Mary. They were all commanded to worship only one god. There is no god except He. Be He glorified, high above having any partners. They seek to extinguish the light of ALLAH with their mouths; but ALLAH refuses but to perfect HIS light, though the disbelievers may resent it. He it is Who sent His Apostle with guidance and the religion of truth, that He might cause it to prevail over all religions, though the polytheists may resent it.”
Sura 10:68 “They said, “Allah has begotten a son!” Be He glorified. He is the Most Rich. To Him belongs everything in the heavens and everything on earth. You have no proof to support such a blasphemy. Are you saying about Allah what you do not know? Say: Those who forge a lie against Allah shall not be successful.A little enjoyment in this world!- and then, to Us will be their return, then shall We make them taste the severest penalty for their blasphemies. ”
I’m not advocating the book burning. I am advocating an examination of the book so we can understand the roots of the violence embedded in its message.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 9, 2010, at 2:38 pm
Please keep comments focused on journalism coverage.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 9, 2010, at 3:25 pm
I just spoke with a friend in Paris who told me that the story is dominating the news and that Pr. Jones is being presented as some sort of grand mufti of Christianity. It’s beyond ridiculous and I’m beginning to wonder about ALL coverage.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
September 9, 2010, at 5:55 pm
If faith, hope and charity are the Three Virtues, what do they have to do with burning books?
Mollie:
Living in Paris the summer of 1964, I read in Paris papers about the non-existent horrible riots in New York at the World’s Fair. [there were some very civil protests] Then, when I returned home I read in saved-for-me American newspapers about the student riots in Paris that had occurred during the summer, which I completely missed even though I had been a student at the Sorbonne at the relevant time.
That’s when I started reading and listening to the news with skepticism.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0