, , ,

Popemania: How much coverage of Francis' visit to U.S. is too much?

, , ,

I got my first taste of Popemania in 1999.

The Oklahoman put me on an airplane and sent me to cover Pope John Paul II's visit to St. Louis. 

In my introductory post with GetReligion, I made this confession about that experience:

After nearly 10 years in the newspaper business, I knew how to chase fire trucks and police cars and burn the midnight oil with city councils and school boards. But my knowledge of the Roman Catholic Church was scant. Honestly, I had no idea what a diocese was. I didn't know the difference between a bishop and a cardinal. I had heard of the pope.
Despite a mild case of fear and trembling, I researched the basics of Catholic faith and prepared to handle the assignment. I wrote three or four Page 1 stories the week of the pope's visit. My favorite focused on a youth event where Catholic teens jammed to the ear-piercing beat of DC Talk's "Jesus Freak" before welcoming to the stage a gray-haired pontiff who walked with a cane.

No doubt, I perfected the unfine art of #PapalGoofs long before hashtags were cool.

My first pope story was a Page 1 Sunday advance on Oklahomans making the trek to see their spiritual leader in person. For The Oklahoman, John Paul's visit was a local story as much as a national and international headline.

All these years later, the same remains true for newspapers across the U.S.

While much of the local and regional coverage focuses on parishioners making the pilgrimage, a reader pointed us to a nuanced profile of Francis in the Dayton Daily News in Ohio:


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

Pope in DC: Ssssshhhh! Francis also slipped away to visit the Little Sisters of the Poor

, , , , , , , , ,

Whenever the pope -- any pope, at any point in time -- comes to town, the visit generates thousands of words of content from speeches, homilies, remarks by dignitaries and in reactions from Catholics and others on the street. It's a classic case of the big journalism question: OK. What's the news here? What goes at the top of the main story?

Throw in the superstar status Pope Francis currently enjoys with the mainstream press and this question becomes even more important.

In an early report on the pope's packed day in D.C., The Washington Post took a safe and responsible tact -- casting a broad net over a host of issues.

But what if, at the end of the day, Francis added a new and unexpected event to his calendar, one linked to issues that have dominated U.S. headlines this past year both at the U.S. Supreme Court and in Congress? Would that event be worthy of prime coverage? Hold. That. Thought.

First, here is how the Post opened an early version of its summary story:

A fast-moving Pope Francis plunged into his first U.S. visit with gusto Wednesday, embracing the adulation of jubilant crowds as he crisscrossed Washington and confronted enduring controversies that included global warming, immigration and the clergy abuse scandal.
The popular pontiff, who has captured the imagination of religious and secular Americans with his humble style, began to establish an in-the-flesh identity as a committed champion of the poor, the dispossessed and the planet. But he also positioned himself as a loyal adherent of church teachings and hierarchies that are much less popular than he is, pushing back, Vatican watchers said, on efforts to enlist him on either side of the culture wars.
The pope thrilled a White House gathering by introducing himself as the son of immigrants and aligning himself with President Obama’s climate-change efforts. But he also echoed the call for religious liberty that conservatives claim as resistance to same-sex marriage and other fast-changing social mores.

Lots of content, touching on many topics. However, at the end of the day Francis himself added a highly symbolic grace note -- slipping away to meet with members of the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order dedicated to helping the poor and elderly.


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

Logic? Some reporters should think harder about Catholic stuff before clicking 'send'

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Hey, reporters and editors: Can we talk? Let's include people who work at religious publications and wire services (Catholic, especially, in this case), as well as those who work in the mainstream press.

Some things are getting into cyber-print, during the tsunami of Pope Francis coverage, that really have me scratching my head. 

Trust me, I understand that there are plenty of journalists out there who do not agree with the teachings of the Catholic church. #Duh. I have disagreements with Rome myself. No one needs to agree with a religious group in order to cover it accurately.

I also know that there are reporters who do not know very much about what the Catholic church teaches. That's OK, too, so long as they know what they don't know and are willing to apply their journalistic skills to finding on-the-record sources who can help them get details right, as well as handle the debates that take place when Catholics argue with one another.

But then there are headlines and stories like this one in that ran in The Chicago Sun-Times that just don't make sense. In this case the headline proclaims: "Fired from Catholic school for being gay, she's now seeing the pope." Right, this story was linked to the White House invitations that were award to outspoken critics of Catholic doctrines.

But before we look at the story, let me ask -- just between us journalists -- a question or two. Here goes. How many of you know gay and lesbian Catholics who, when it comes to what the Catechism says about sexual morality:


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

New York Times celebrates Pelosi's 'unwavering faith' in opposing Catholic teachings

, , , , , , , , ,

Every few weeks, it seems, mainstream media celebrate a "devout" or "faithful" Catholic who takes a brave stand against church structures and strictures. This week in the New York Times, it's Nancy Pelosi.

"Strong Catholic Faith," says the headline about the California Democrat. "Unwavering faith," says the lede. And papal teachings? She reads encyclicals with "rapt attention."

With one exception: abortion. That's a "core value" for her politics and her right as a woman.

The time peg, of course, is the planned address of Pope Francis at a joint session of Congress on Thursday -- a Congress, as the Times reports, that is more than 30 percent Catholic. A further ingredient is the current debate over defunding Planned Parenthood, in the wake of widely publicized videos said to show that the group profits from selling aborted fetal body parts.

Where to bring all this together? For the Times, it's one of the best-known members of Congress , who champions "family planning" and embraces a "strong Catholic faith:"

For Representative Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, the issue of abortion rights has always been ancillary to her unwavering faith and deep approbation for generations of popes. “I actually agree with the pope on more issues than many Catholics who agree with him on one issue,” Ms. Pelosi said in an interview in her office at the Capitol last week.
But that one issue, abortion, is adding a thick layer of tension to the otherwise convivial mood as Congress prepares for the arrival of Pope Francis this week. The Capitol is ensnared in an imbroglio over funding for Planned Parenthood and a host of other abortion-related fights that could lead to a government shutdown next week.

Pelosi's Catholic creds? Well, she grew up in a "large Catholic family, for which faith was central and reverence for the pope was assured." She attended a Catholic high school and a Catholic women's college.  And she has met an amazing four popes, starting with Pius XII while she was in eighth grade.

She also reads papal teaching letters avidly, the Times says:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , ,

Reporter does it all: gushes over Francis, receives blessing, covers papal trip for CNN

, , , ,

In journalism, some rules are pretty clear.

White House correspondents don't wave campaign signs for the president.

Sports journalists don't ask athletes for autographs.

And reporters aboard the papal plane don't gush over the pope, receive blessings from him and offer him gifts.

Oh, wait ...

Rosa Flores is a CNN correspondent covering Pope Francis' visit to Cuba and the United States. And she's downright giddy about meeting the pope — and receiving a blessing from him.

Think I'm exaggerating? Check out this on-air exchange between Flores and CNN anchor Poppy Harlow: 

From a transcript of that conversation:

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Our Rosa Flores is live in Havana. She has the extraordinary job of flying with the pope from Rome to Havana. She will be with him on this entire trip. 

Rosa, I have to begin as you tell me about this remarkable experience with showing everyone the photograph of the pope blessing you. What was it like?

ROSA FLORES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, it was just such an incredible moment, Poppy. I really have no words to describe it other than he has just so much grace with people. We spent about 45 seconds together. We joked a little bit about actually a friend of his, a priest that I talked to before I got on the plane. And the priest told me, you know, "Give him a hug for me, Rosa. I didn't dare to hug a Holy Father. Let me just put it that way." But then the Holy Father goes on to tell me, Poppy, hear this. He says -- "This father, how dare he come to me two days before the conclave and ask me how I'm doing." He's like, who in their right mind would ask me that. Oh, with just such emotion, Poppy. Everybody around us. I can't wait to show you this video, because everybody just starts laughing. And then I had a tiny token, a small gift for the Holy Father. As you probably know, Mexican Catholics are very devout to Our Lady of Guadalupe, so I brought a little prayer for him, because, of course, I'm Mexican, Mexican-American. So you should see his face. As soon as he sees it, he grabs my prayer card from my hand, he starts kissing it. Oh, I almost went speechless, because I wanted to chat with him and I'm looking at the pope and he is just lighting up, looking at Our Lady of Guadalupe. Then, of course, I asked him for his blessing, and that's the picture that you were able to see. 


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

Washington Post feature sticks Chaput inside an 'omniscient anonymous' voice box

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

When it comes to biblical images of good and evil, you start off with God, as opposed to Satan, and then you have Christ, as opposed to the mysterious end-times tyrant called the Antichrist.

Now with that in mind, it's safe to say that in current news speak, Pope Francis is pretty much the top of the heap when it comes to good-guy status. It really doesn't matter that the edited Francis who appears in most mainstream news coverage ("Who am I to judge?") is not quite the same pope who appears in the full texts of his homilies and writings ("It is not 'progressive' to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life").

Thus, it's safe to say that calling a Catholic archbishop the anti-Francis is not a compliment.

Apparently, there are Catholics who have pinned that label on Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput and they have shared their views with The Washington Post. Readers do not know who these Catholics (and probably some journalists) are, however, because that would require Post editors to ask some of their reporters to attribute crucial information to named sources. That would be old-school journalism. That would be bad, or so it seems.

The new Post profile of Chaput contains some interesting information, including some drawn from pieces of an email interview with the archbishop. It is also positive that Post editors posted the email-interview text online. I wonder if this was a condition attached to the interview, or whether editors realized that it would be awkward if Chaput posted the text, thus allowing readers to see what he actually said. Either way, this was a constructive act.

(At this point I will stress, as I always do, that I met Chaput decades ago when he was a young Capuchin-Franciscan priest and campus minister in urban Denver and I was a newcomer on the local religion beat. We have been talking about issues of faith, mass media and popular culture ever since.)

Let's return to those anonymous Catholic voices. The Post piece opens with an anecdote about Chaput's skill at blunt, quotable remarks, some of which have been known to anger those on the other side of hot-button issues in public life. Then it launches into a classic example of the "omniscient anonymous voice" narrative that has, in recent months, dominated much of this newspaper's coverage of moral, cultural and religious issues.

This long summary passage -- the story's thesis -- frames the contents of the entire piece. Try to find some clearly identified sources.


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

Sweating a few fine (even fried) pope details in the wake of #PapalGoofs

, , , , , , ,

Just the other day, Father James Martin started a Jesuit Twitter fest with #PapalGoofs, a hashtag dedicated to helping journalists who -- forced into religion-beat duty with the arrival of Hurricane (Pope) Francis -- could use a online Catholicism 101 course.

While the padre, who is best known outside of bookstores as the official chaplain to the old "Colbert Report," has yet to jump back into the Twitter fray, others have picked up #PapalGoofs and are using it as a hook for social-media discussions of fumbles and outright errors in coverage of events and trends linked to the arrival of Pope Francis.

For example, consider this a nomination for the most simplistic (folks, the competition is fierce) use of this pope's most famous out-of context soundbite. This comes to you care of The Memphis Commercial Appeal:

When Francis was asked whether homosexuality is a sin, he replied, "Who am I to judge?"

Not even close, as one can see with even a glancing look at the actual transcript of that off-the-cuff papal press conference. The actual question?

I would like permission to ask a delicate question: another image that has been going around the world is that of Monsignor Ricca and the news about his private life. I would like to know, Your Holiness, what you intend to do about this? How are you confronting this issue and how does Your Holiness intend to confront the whole question of the gay lobby?

The pope was asked about rumors concerning a specific Vatican priest and, in his answer, stressed -- using the word "sin" over and over -- that those who confess their sins can be forgiven and those sins are gone, in the past.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , ,

Click 'like' for stories on what it takes to pull together a hugely complex papal tour

, , , ,
Click 'like' for stories on what it takes to pull together a hugely complex papal tour

Well here we are, smack in the middle of Papal-Visit-Coverage-Overload. But, to quote the omnipresent Pope Francis media soundbite (while shifting the context), "Who am I to judge?" So let's follow suit.

However, let's go small. You know, stay humble, in keeping with Francis' persona. Let's put the Big Picture stories aside for a few minutes (or however long it takes for you to read this post TO ITS END, if you please). Let's start with some questions.

Do you think the pontiff's expression of what it means to be Roman Catholic is being adequately presented by the mainstream news media? Are his statements  being forced through the prism of American politics? Do you think Francis is a breath of much-needed fresh air for the global Church he leads, or a good-hearted but naive and out-of-touch pastor?

Now put all that aside. There are plenty of other posts on GetReligion dealing with all that weighty stuff. Not to mention every other website, print publication and broadcast outlet that claims to produce journalism.

Instead, let's look at the nitty-gritty details of what allows this avalanche of hyperbolic coverage to take place. 

I'm speaking, of course, of the logistical miracle -- colloquially speaking, that is -- pulled off by the Vatican and the local church each time Francis, or any modern pope, leaves Rome to jet around the world.


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

Muslim-Americans are uncomfortably yanked into center of new political storm

, , , , , , , , ,
Muslim-Americans are uncomfortably yanked into center of new political storm

Time for beat reporters to dig out their lists of good U.S. Muslim sources again.

Quite suddenly, the United States has tumbled into a major interfaith moment. The current episode began with a New Hampshire town hall question tossed at GOP candidate Donald Trump on September 17. In case you missed it, a man wearing a TRUMP T-shirt stated:

“We have a problem in this country. It’s called Muslims. We know our current president is one. You know he’s not even an American -- birth certificate, man. But anyway, we have training camps growing where they want to kill us. That’s my question. When can we get rid of them?”

 Note: Get rid of alleged training camps? Or get rid of American Muslims, who are the country’s “problem”?  

Either way it was an unusually perfervid attack, compounded by raising of the oft-refuted but persistent claims that President Barack Obama is Muslim and also wasn’t born in America so  is an illegal president. Trump’s fuzzy response didn’t address any of that and he was uncharacteristically silent the following day.

Meanwhile Washington’s Council on American-Islamic Relations was quick on the uptake, as usual. Its chief lobbyist Robert McCaw said that “in failing to challenge the questioner’s anti-Muslim bigotry and his apparent call for the ethnic cleansing of American Muslims, Donald Trump sent the message that Islamophobia is acceptable.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy