I know from personal experience that Terre Haute, Indiana, is not the most happening place. But is “Church sign raises objection” really one of the most newsworthy items of the day?
Who’s offended?
Please respect our Commenting Policy
Teletubbies and ... Islam?
Why, oh why, must all religion stories be told through the prism of politics? It really gets tiring. For instance, there was this Washington Post piece last Sunday about how Pat Robertson had said something intemperate (I know! Stop the presses!) about Islam that reflected poorly on Virginia Governor-elect Bob McDonnell. Robertson hadn't made the comments with McDonnell or at a McDonnell event or in McDonnell campaign literature or anything like that. But he was a big donor to McDonnell's campaign and McDonnell attended a graduate school affiliated with Robertson and so the Post argued that he might have to respond to the remarks.
The story was published in another context, which is that the Post worked hard during the campaign to tarnish McDonnell, a Republican, as a particularly bad social conservative. Unfortunately for them, he won in an 18-point landslide over his Democratic opponent. But if the Post is going to start paying attention to the controversial affiliations of politicians, it's a good thing for everyone.
Okay, so CNN now picks up the story and we get this update, headlined "McDonnell won't disavow Robertson's Islam remarks":
Virginia Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell on Wednesday would not disavow Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson's recent claim that Islam is not a religion, but "a violent political system."
So McDonnell agrees with Robertson? Or, at the very least, doesn't disagree with him that Islam is not a religion but a violent political system? Well, not exactly. Here are the final two paragraphs of the story:
Please respect our Commenting Policy
Why did Muhammad do it?
Please respect our Commenting Policy
Are all terrorists the same?
Please respect our Commenting Policy
Quote malpractice
I’m preparing to do a larger post looking at the two distinct ways that the mainstream media have been covering the story of the shooting at Fort Hood — either viewing religion as a major aspect of the shooter’s motivation or working overtime to avoid considering religion as a major aspect. In my research, I came across this CNN interview of a private who was wounded during the attack. It’s an interesting video interview that was written up for CNN.com. Here’s how the write-up of the interview begins:
Please respect our Commenting Policy
After Fort Hood: When Muslims disagree
I was on a flight from Baltimore to the West Coast early this week and ended up sitting next to a young Muslim who was originally from Kenya. However, as soon as he came to the United States he joined the U.S. Army as a way to obtain funds to go to college. He spent most of his years in military service in Korea.
Please respect our Commenting Policy
Nidal Hasan: 'orthodox' or extemist?
We’re still learning a lot about Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, though I doubt his Muslim beliefs were, as reported by NPR’s Daniel Zwerdling this morning, “orthodox.” I know more than a few traditionally observant Muslims who would dispute that.
Please respect our Commenting Policy
Military worried, but are Muslims?
Coverage of the tragedy at Fort Hood, which left at least 13 dead, has continued its evolution. I mentioned Friday that it began with shock and ended up with Muslims condemning the alleged actions of Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan. The focus now has turned to fallout for the thousands of other Muslim members of the active-duty military.
Please respect our Commenting Policy
Of course, Friday prayers were important
Sometimes, it’s hard to believe what your ears are hearing — especially when you are listening to broadcast journalists having to work on deadline under tremendous amounts of pressure. That is why journalists hire experts, people to help them navigate the dense and often tricky language and symbolism of complex organizations, rituals and traditions.
Please respect our Commenting Policy