, , , , , , , ,

Reporters' reminders: (1) Two stories can be one story, so (2) watch religious media for ideas

, , , , , , , ,
Reporters' reminders: (1) Two stories can be one story, so (2) watch religious media for ideas

The following is an example of how two separate stories can be analyzed as one story. It also demonstrates why the complete religion reporter working in the mainstream Media will continually look for material in specialized news outlets.

Story #1, which The Guy depicted April 4, is the demise of the once mighty Christian Booksellers Association, founded in 1950 at the beginning of the post-war evangelical boom and lately a victim of the woes hitting all brick-and-mortar retail. (The group was later renamed CBA: The Association for Christian Retail, to signify that members sold much more than books).

Story #2, which hit almost simultaneously, is the financial peril and potential collapse of what has been an equally prominent organization, National Religious Broadcasters, formed in 1944.

Writers can learn all the sorry details from a June 20 exploration on the website of freelance writer Julia Roys, a Nov. 6 follow-up for the watchdog group Ministry Watch by beat veteran Steve Rabey, and a rundown in the Sept. 28 issue of World magazine, which commendably has an investigative reporting team run by the author, Michael Reneau.

All three articles raise an important and related question journalists might pursue separately: In light of the NRB situation, can donors rely much on certification by the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability?

Now, why does The Guy propose that the troubles of CBA and NRB be treated as a single story?

Despite their non-sectarian names, both organizations are thoroughly evangelical Protestant, and together have been key players in that U.S. movement in the same way for decades. Their two bustling trade shows each year were all-important for networking, shaping the subculture, promoting popular theologies and showcasing stars old and new.

Both were especially vital for the complex world of “parachurch” ministries, which lack the interconnections provided by denominations. The broadcasters’ group, whose meetings drew notables from U.S. presidents on down, also played a role in lobbying government on behalf of media interests.


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

The Rev. Fred Rogers was a remarkably kind man. So is Tom Hanks. Any religion content here?

, , , , , , , , ,

It’s the big question journalists ask when investigating the life of the Rev. Fred Rogers, the ordained Presbyterian minister who became one of the most iconic figures in television history.

Was this man as stunningly kind and compassionate as he seemed to be when he gazed through a television lens and into the minds and hearts of millions of children? Was he real? This was, of course, the question at the heart of a brilliant 2018 documentary entitled, “Won't You Be My Neighbor?”

Now, only a year later, the same question is the hook for the plot of a new feature film entitled, “A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood.”

Further complicating matters is the fact that Mister Rogers, in this film, is played by actor Tom Hanks, an actor whose career — especially the second half of it — has been haunted by similar questions: Could Hanks truly be as nice, as kind and as sensitive as his coworkers say that he is? Is Hanks real?

These two questions come together in a long, first-person New York Times arts feature by Taffy Brodesser-Akner that ran under this rather meta double-decker headline:

This Tom Hanks Story Will Help You Feel Less Bad

Hanks is playing Mister Rogers in a new movie and is just as nice as you think he is. Please read this article anyway.

It’s a must-read story, even though it has — #Surprise — a massive God-shaped hole in the middle of it.

What role did faith play in the work of the seminary-trained Rogers? Apparently none.

What did Hanks — a churchgoer — think about the faith-driven side of Rogers life and work, a topic that Rogers talked about on many occasions? Once again, the answer seems to be — nada.

Are these questions relevant in a Times feature in which the pivotal moment, in the real story behind the movie plot, was Mister Rogers pausing to pray with a troubled journalist? Yes, we are talking about real, personal prayer. Here is a long chunk of the Times piece that is hard to edit or shorten:


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

Russia, the Kurds, Trump and some Syrian Jews: When in doubt stress the political angle

, , , , , , , , , ,
Russia, the Kurds, Trump and some Syrian Jews: When in doubt stress the political angle

A common complaint from those steeped in religious belief is that the mainstream media generally pay scant attention to religion issues unless there’s a political angle to exploit (or even better, a scandal; the sexier the better).

As a mainstream media member, mark me down as among the often guilty. But unapologetically so. Because to quote a certain White House acting chief of staff (as of this writing, that is), “Get over it.”

That’s just the way it is in our material world and no amount of high-minded whining will change it. So critics: it’s disingenuous to deny that religion and politics are not frequently entwined, for better or (more often) worse.

GetReligion head honcho Terry Mattingly tackled this question in a recent post and podcast devoted to Russia’s self-proclaimed role as chief protector of Middle East Christians — in particular those with Orthodox Christian bona fides. His point was that religion was an essential part of the equation, in addition to the obvious political and economic realities.

Syria, where Russia has taken over as the major outside power broker now that President Donald Trump has relinquished the United State’s role there, is a current case in point.

But Christians are not the only faith group of concern to the Kremlin. Syrian Jews, despite being few in number, have also stirred Russia’s interest. It’s as clear a case of politics overshadowing religious connections as you’ll find.

This recent analysis published by the liberal Israeli English-Hebrew daily Haaretz alerted me to the situation. (Paywall alert.)

The piece was thin on just what Syrian Jews Russian President Vladimir Putin indicated, during a recent trip to Hungary, he is concerned about. Was he referring to the less than two-dozen Mizrahi Jews (Jews long connected to Arab lands) estimated to still reside in Syria?


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

Surprise! National Geographic's definitive issue on women gives religion short shrift

, , , , , , , , , ,

This month’s issue of National Geographic is a special issue on women that appears to be the start of a yearlong project. All the contributing writers, photographers and artists were female.

So here is a rather obvious fact to note right up front. Being that women lead the way in religious observance around the planet, I thought there would be at least some representation of women in religion.

So I read through the entire issue. Answer: There is and there isn’t.

Since the text of the issue isn’t online yet, I can’t cut and paste much. So what did they include?

There’s a picturesque double-page spread of five nuns from Kerala, India in their brown habits. The text says:

Their superiors keep pressuring them to keep quiet and stop making trouble, but they refuse. When a nun in Kerala told church leaders multiple times that a bishop had raped her repeatedly, nothing happened, so she turned to the police.

Months later, in September 2018, these fellow nuns joined a two-week protest outside the Kerala High Court. The bishop, who maintains his innocence, eventually was arrested…Instead of supporting the nuns, the church cut off the protesting nuns’ monthly allowance.

That was the only mention I could find of any Christian women in the entire issue.

Much better represented were Muslim women, such as France’s first black Muslim woman mayor Marième Tamata-Varin (p. 58); the anti-hijab movement in Iran (p. 59) and Meherzia Labidi, the Tunisian politician who likes being veiled (p. 72).


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , ,

Defying stereotypes: The Atlantic's Emma Green paints a nuanced portrait of Trump voters in Iowa

, , , ,

You’ve heard the same stat over and over: 81 percent of white evangelicals voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

That is true, but it doesn’t tell the whole story.

Yet in the three years since Trump’s shocking upset of Hillary Clinton, many in the mainstream press have pushed the idea that all white evangelicals — well, 81 percent of them anyway — love Trump and everything about him.

In typical stories along those lines, there’s no room for nuance and no room for white evangelicals to have complicated feelings about Trump. It’s as if the reporters conveniently forget that there was another candidate on the ballot. A candidate who, like Trump, was one of the most unpopular major party nominees in history. And who, unlike Trump, clashed with many white evangelicals on issues such as abortion.

Given the preponderance of the aforementioned narrative, it’s especially nice when an award-winning Godbeat pro like The Atlantic’s Emma Green produces a piece — as she is so apt to do — that defies the worn-out stereotypes and digs deeper on the familiar stat so often repeated.

I’m talking about Green’s report out of Iowa this week titled “They Support Trump. They Want Him Impeached.”

The headline is partly clickbait and partly a mostly accurate assessment of Green’s report, which opens with this compelling scene:

SIOUX CENTER, Iowa — The small towns that run across Iowa’s northwest corner form a district that is as politically red as it gets in America. There are vast stretches of farmland; public-school football teams pray together after games; Christian music regularly plays over the loudspeakers in shopping centers. Voters here in Iowa’s Fourth Congressional District have sent Representative Steve King back to Washington every year since 2003, and 81 percent of those in Sioux County, near the district’s northwest corner, chose Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016, a higher pro-Trump percentage than anywhere else in the state.

Still, even some of these hard-core Republicans wouldn’t mind if Trump were impeached before Election Day 2020.

Polling suggests the president’s base nationwide is firmly opposed to impeachment, and that people’s opinions on the inquiry are split neatly along partisan lines. But at least in Sioux Center, where Republican presidential candidates regularly make pit stops during the primary season, some conservatives still feel ambivalent about Trump’s policies and character. In my conversations around town, people were skeptical that the impeachment inquiry would go anywhere, but they smiled ruefully at the fantasy of a President Mike Pence and a clean slate of Republican candidates in 2020. While voters in this area clearly preferred Trump over Clinton in 2016 and told me they have appreciated some of his work over the past two and a half years, there’s a difference between defending Trump and supporting him. However skeptical people here may be of Democrats’ motives and the likelihood of success, impeachment offers a distant dream of a return to Republican “politics as usual.”


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

USA Today hunts for 'The Priest Next Door,' in sex abuse feature that breaks little new ground

, , , , , , , , , ,

If you follow mainstream news coverage of clergy sexual abuse cases in the Catholic church, you know that there are two common errors that journalists keep making when dealing with this hellish subject.

First, there is the timeline issue. Many editors seem convinced that the public first learned about this crisis through the epic Boston Globe “Spotlight” series that ran in 2002.

This may have been when Hollywood grasped the size of this story, but religion beat reporters and many other journalists had been following the scandal since the Louisiana accusations against the Rev. Gilbert Gauthe, which made national headlines in 1984. Jason Berry’s trailblazing book “Lead Us Not Into Temptation” was published in 1992. Reporters covering the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops chased this story all through the 1980s.

Does this error matter? I guess it only matters if editors care about accuracy and they truly want readers to understand how long these horrors have poisoned life for many Catholics. After all, the cover-ups are as important as the crimes.

Thus, it’s disappointing to dig into the new USA Today feature on this topic — “The Priest Next Door” — and hit the following summary material:

During its nine-month investigation, the USA TODAY Network tracked down last known addresses for nearly 700 former priests who have been publicly accused of sexual abuse. Then, 38 reporters knocked on more than 100 doors across the country, from Portland, Oregon, to Long Island, New York, with stops in Philadelphia, Chicago, Indianapolis, Miami and more. They talked with accused priests, as well as neighbors, school officials, employers, church leaders and victims. They reviewed court records, social media accounts and church documents in piecing together a nationwide accounting of what happened after priests were accused of abuse, left their positions in the church and were essentially allowed to go free. 

Since the scandal first exploded into public view in Boston almost 20 years ago, the church has financially settled with thousands of victims, claimed bankruptcy at parishes across the country and watched disaffected congregants flee its pews. The church has promised change, with parishes posting guidelines aimed at protecting children and dioceses releasing names of credibly accused priests — many of whom were defrocked, or laicized, meaning they no longer work with the church.

The second problem that keeps showing up in stories of this kind? That would be covering sexual-abuse scandals among Catholics without mentioning that similar issues exist in other religious flocks — as well as in public schools, sports programs, nonprofit agencies (think Scouting) and other secular settings.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , ,

Words of the dying when on the threshold: What are these people talking about?

, , ,

Linguist Michael Erard, a regular contributor to The Atlantic, shows a remarkable talent for writing on academic questions in a style unencumbered by the academy’s jargon. “What People Actually Say Before They Die,” which he wrote at the beginning of this year, appeared on the longform buffet again recently, courtesy of the curators of the Mozilla-owned Pocket.

The gratuitous use of actually in the headline alludes to the cultural hunger for famous last words that sound too much like sound bites or aphorisms to seem quite believable. Pithy sentences attributed to the dying, Erard writes, “are the cornerstone of a romantic vision of death — one that falsely promises a final burst of lucidity and meaning before a person passes.”

I find Erard’s piece especially significant because he stares into a phenomenon every person will face, usually in the order of being present with a loved one who is dying and later becoming the person who dies.

Erard’s article opens with the story of Mort Felix, a lifelong atheist who joked about his plans for an upbeat death but found a more harrowing experience during three painful weeks in 2002. Lisa Smartt, his daughter, took extensive notes on what Felix said during his final weeks, and later wrote “Words on the Threshold: What We Say as We’re Nearing Death" (New World Library, 2017).

Erard writes about Smartt’s work:

One common pattern she noted was that when her father, Felix, used pronouns such as it and this, they didn’t clearly refer to anything. One time he said, “I want to pull these down to earth somehow … I really don’t know … no more earth binding.” What did these refer to? His sense of his body in space seemed to be shifting. “I got to go down there. I have to go down,” he said, even though there was nothing below him.

He also repeated words and phrases, often ones that made no sense. “The green dimension! The green dimension!” (Repetition is common in the speech of people with dementia and also those who are delirious.) Smartt found that repetitions often expressed themes such as gratitude and resistance to death. But there were also unexpected motifs, such as circles, numbers, and motion. “I’ve got to get off, get off! Off of this life,” Felix had said.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

A reader asks: Is there a religion ghost in story of man arrested for popping 'Baby Trump' balloon?

, , , , ,

“Baby Trump” met his demise in Alabama over the weekend. Not for the first time, though.

Who, some might ask, is Baby Trump?

According to Heavy.com, he’s an “iconic” balloon that is “widely known as a symbol to protest the President.” Evidently, not everybody is a fan of Baby Trump. And perhaps, just perhaps, a holy ghost haunts the latest news involving the big balloon. More on that in a moment.

First, though, let’s meet Hoyt Hutchinson. ABC News reports:

A few dozen people were gathered in Monnish Park protesting the president's visit to the Alabama-LSU football game a half-mile away and holding various anti-Trump signs when a disapproving man approached the helium-balloon with a knife and slashed an 8-foot-long gash in its back. There were still two hours to kickoff in the college town when "Baby Trump" quickly deflated out and the balloon-stabbing suspect attempted to flee the scene, organizers said.

Tuscaloosa police said in a statement that officers witnessed the incident which led them to arrest Hoyt Deau Hutchinson, 32, and charge him with felony first degree criminal mischief. He was booked into the Tuscaloosa County Jail and held on a $2,500 bond. The slashing appears to have been premeditated as Hutchinson posted a Facebook Live video just hours before the incident saying he was "going down [there] to make a scene ... I'm shaking I'm so mad right now," he said. "I'm fixin’ to pop this balloon, without a doubt."

The Alabama Media Group adds more details to the story today, noting that the Baby Trump stabber gave a radio interview in which he cast his action as a case of “good vs. evil.”

“Seems like a ghost or two here,” said a reader who shared that link with GetReligion. “What church does he go to? What do they think?”


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

Black Panther actress links life, faith, depression, acting -- while reporters miss ties that bind

, , , , , , , , ,

Every now and then, a loyal GetReligion reader sends us a URL to a story and makes a remark like this: “Says it all. Run this.”

When this happens, you can almost always count on the URL being from some alternative source of news and commentary, the kind of advocacy driven site that we don’t pay much attention to — since GetReligion focuses on hard news. Of course, we do run “think pieces” on the weekend linked to religion-news trends that tend to come from all over the place.

In this case, the subject of the piece is a public figure — a popular actress — stating that she has noticed a trend in news coverage about her work, as her star ascends in the Marvel Universe and elsewhere.

The headline states the thesis: “ ‘Black Panther’ Star: Journalists Censor When ‘I Give God the Glory.’ “ And here is the overture of this piece at the CatholicVote website:

Letitia Wright captivated millions on the big screen as Shuri, the younger sister of T’Challa, or the Black Panther. But, as her career continues skyrocketing, she wants the world to know that her success is not her own; it’s God’s. 

If only the media would report on it.

The 26-year-old actress, born in Guyana and raised in London, recently took to Twitter to express frustration over some journalists cutting out her praise for God from interviews.

“It’s super cute when journalists/interviewers for magazines leave out the massive part where I give God the glory for the success/ achievements in my life,” Wright tweeted on October 28. And yet, she added, “I still love you and God will still be praised.”

Her fans agreed. 

“[F]avorite actress not just for talent but for the faith in God!!!” exclaimed one follower, while another added, “God sees you sis.” Black-ish actor Miles Brown also chimed in, responding with emojis of hands clapping in applause.

Now, I freely admit that people have been talking about this story, and this tweet, for some time now.

In part, that’s because of this interesting response from Sarah Pulliam Bailey of the Washington Post (a former member of the GetReligion team).


Please respect our Commenting Policy