Reader responds to media coverage of abuse in the Church
July 29, 2019 at 12:37 p.m.
Where has journalistic integrity gone?
The Monitor was right on when it observed that truth is taking a back seat to expediency and sensationalism. The credibility of a number of news organizations seems to be disappearing. Some examples from the media’s coverage of the Church sexual abuse story:
In the March 16th broadcast of “Anderson Cooper 360” on CNN, the preview for an upcoming story went as follows:
“The Vatican sex abuse. What did the Pope know and when did he know it? As cardinal, he was in charge of investigating abuse allegations. But now there are questions about whether he was really doing his job. We are ‘Keeping Them Honest.’”
Well, Anderson Cooper 360, here’s keeping you honest. At the beginning of the story the reporter states: “The questions at the center of the crisis are what did Pope Benedict know and when did he know about it and what did he do about it?... They are questions that began two decades ago when the Pope was known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. For 23 years he was the Vatican's chief investigator into allegations of abuse by priests.” Following the story comes an interview with John Allen, CNN’s Vatican Analyst. In his response to one of Anderson Cooper’s questions Allen says, “One small point about the pope’s role in the Vatican; his office only got the responsibility for the sex abuse mess in 2001. So from 1982 to 2001 then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger really had no direct personal oversight over the sex abuse cases of any kind.”
Okay, but then what was that whole thing a few minutes ago about “whether he was really doing his job” for the “23 years he was the Vatican’s chief investigator into allegations of abuse by priests?” Something doesn’t seem to add up.
In a taped report that aired during Campbell Brown on CNN April 1st, CNN’s reporter identifies Cardinal William Levada as the prefect “for the doctrine for the congregation of the faith.” Details of course don’t matter in journalism anymore, so CNN is free to change Cardinal Levada’s department. His real department is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. People mis-speak, but if a reporter called Hillary Clinton “the State of Secretary” in a taped segment wouldn’t they do a second take?
An honest and just report also means honest and just commentary. In the “Big 360 Interview” (the name for one of their segments) on CNN March 26th, Anderson Cooper interviewed Sinead O’Connor for perspective on the Church sexual abuse story. Ms. O’Connor has a right to believe and say what she wants, but one wonders what real journalistic value there was in this interview:
O’Connor: I don't believe it matters if you call it God, Buddha, Krishna, Jesus, Fred or Daisy. It is the Holy Spirit. It does not matter. But what I would like to see, as a Catholic, is actually Christian honest people running the shop. It seems to me that the Vatican are not – don't actually believe in God at all. They are certainly not acting like they believe in a God that watches.
Cooper: It is interesting. So, you actually – you don't believe that this pope or that the people who are running the Vatican right now, you are saying they don't really believe in God, because, if they did, they – they would know that God is watching over everything?
O’Connor: Well, they wouldn't be lying if they believed in God. If they believed in God, why would they lie before God? The pope's letter [to the Church in Ireland], itself, is full of lies and dishonesty.
Not to be outdone is MSNBC, where on March 29th David Schuster interviewed Sally Quinn, religion columnist for The Washington Post. Ms. Quinn comfortably and confidently stated that Pope Benedict XVI should resign:
Quinn: This is the Vatican’s Watergate. The pope is Nixon. I mean, if you look at the signs, and the way they’re behaving, it’s exactly the same way. They’ve done something terrible. They’ve denied it….The pope is going to have to resign.
Shuster: What point will that come? Is there, to use the Watergate analogy, are there a group of high-ranking cardinals or Catholics that would go to the pope and say we’ve reached a point where, “Okay, for the good of the Church we need you to step down.”
Quinn: Yes. That’s exactly what happened. Barry Goldwater led a group of Republicans to the White House and sat down with Nixon and said, “It’s time to go.”
Shuster: Who’s the Barry Goldwater, though, in this particular case?
Quinn: I don’t know who it is, but there will be a point where this is hurting the Church so badly on every level. I mean, the fact is, they have committed crime after crime after crime.
May it be suggested that not knowing who “the Barry Goldwater” of the Vatican is isn’t the only thing Ms. Quinn doesn’t know.
Finally, since when did opinion pieces that have little correspondence to reality make it past the editor’s desk of a major newspaper? Maureen Dowd, New York Times Op-Ed columnist, stated in her March 27 vitriol (that is, column), that American bishops “should spend as much time guarding the kids already under their care as they do championing the rights of those who aren’t yet born.”
Perhaps Ms. Dowd should read The Monitor’s April 1st issue, pages six and seven specifically. (Editor’s Note – the reader refers to an editorial on the Church’s abuse prevention efforts in the United States, available here).
She also stated that the Church “might survive” if it were to, among other things, “invite women to be priests, nuns to be more emancipated and priests to marry.” Dowd ends her column by recommending that Pope Benedict “go home to Bavaria” and for the cardinals to elect a woman pope.
I am not one to challenge Ms. Dowd’s theological or sociological expertise, but women, though not as often, abuse minors as well, and being married hasn’t stopped generations of dads from sexually abusing their, and other people’s, children.
And Maureen, we simple, orthodox folk happen to have it on good authority that the Church will survive. There’s no “might” about it: The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against us.
So please, news organizations, if you are going to cover a story, get your facts straight. If the Catholic faith and Church life is foreign to you, take the time to learn about it. Report the true, whether it is good or bad, and leave out the false, whether it is bad or good. Be honest and be just. Then and only then will you have the respect of fair-minded people.
Then and only then will you be doing your job.
Andrew Faherty
Toms River
The Monitor welcomes your feedback. Selected letters may be published on our website or in our print edition. To submit your comments, click here
Related Stories
Friday, November 29, 2024
E-Editions
Events
Where has journalistic integrity gone?
The Monitor was right on when it observed that truth is taking a back seat to expediency and sensationalism. The credibility of a number of news organizations seems to be disappearing. Some examples from the media’s coverage of the Church sexual abuse story:
In the March 16th broadcast of “Anderson Cooper 360” on CNN, the preview for an upcoming story went as follows:
“The Vatican sex abuse. What did the Pope know and when did he know it? As cardinal, he was in charge of investigating abuse allegations. But now there are questions about whether he was really doing his job. We are ‘Keeping Them Honest.’”
Well, Anderson Cooper 360, here’s keeping you honest. At the beginning of the story the reporter states: “The questions at the center of the crisis are what did Pope Benedict know and when did he know about it and what did he do about it?... They are questions that began two decades ago when the Pope was known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. For 23 years he was the Vatican's chief investigator into allegations of abuse by priests.” Following the story comes an interview with John Allen, CNN’s Vatican Analyst. In his response to one of Anderson Cooper’s questions Allen says, “One small point about the pope’s role in the Vatican; his office only got the responsibility for the sex abuse mess in 2001. So from 1982 to 2001 then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger really had no direct personal oversight over the sex abuse cases of any kind.”
Okay, but then what was that whole thing a few minutes ago about “whether he was really doing his job” for the “23 years he was the Vatican’s chief investigator into allegations of abuse by priests?” Something doesn’t seem to add up.
In a taped report that aired during Campbell Brown on CNN April 1st, CNN’s reporter identifies Cardinal William Levada as the prefect “for the doctrine for the congregation of the faith.” Details of course don’t matter in journalism anymore, so CNN is free to change Cardinal Levada’s department. His real department is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. People mis-speak, but if a reporter called Hillary Clinton “the State of Secretary” in a taped segment wouldn’t they do a second take?
An honest and just report also means honest and just commentary. In the “Big 360 Interview” (the name for one of their segments) on CNN March 26th, Anderson Cooper interviewed Sinead O’Connor for perspective on the Church sexual abuse story. Ms. O’Connor has a right to believe and say what she wants, but one wonders what real journalistic value there was in this interview:
O’Connor: I don't believe it matters if you call it God, Buddha, Krishna, Jesus, Fred or Daisy. It is the Holy Spirit. It does not matter. But what I would like to see, as a Catholic, is actually Christian honest people running the shop. It seems to me that the Vatican are not – don't actually believe in God at all. They are certainly not acting like they believe in a God that watches.
Cooper: It is interesting. So, you actually – you don't believe that this pope or that the people who are running the Vatican right now, you are saying they don't really believe in God, because, if they did, they – they would know that God is watching over everything?
O’Connor: Well, they wouldn't be lying if they believed in God. If they believed in God, why would they lie before God? The pope's letter [to the Church in Ireland], itself, is full of lies and dishonesty.
Not to be outdone is MSNBC, where on March 29th David Schuster interviewed Sally Quinn, religion columnist for The Washington Post. Ms. Quinn comfortably and confidently stated that Pope Benedict XVI should resign:
Quinn: This is the Vatican’s Watergate. The pope is Nixon. I mean, if you look at the signs, and the way they’re behaving, it’s exactly the same way. They’ve done something terrible. They’ve denied it….The pope is going to have to resign.
Shuster: What point will that come? Is there, to use the Watergate analogy, are there a group of high-ranking cardinals or Catholics that would go to the pope and say we’ve reached a point where, “Okay, for the good of the Church we need you to step down.”
Quinn: Yes. That’s exactly what happened. Barry Goldwater led a group of Republicans to the White House and sat down with Nixon and said, “It’s time to go.”
Shuster: Who’s the Barry Goldwater, though, in this particular case?
Quinn: I don’t know who it is, but there will be a point where this is hurting the Church so badly on every level. I mean, the fact is, they have committed crime after crime after crime.
May it be suggested that not knowing who “the Barry Goldwater” of the Vatican is isn’t the only thing Ms. Quinn doesn’t know.
Finally, since when did opinion pieces that have little correspondence to reality make it past the editor’s desk of a major newspaper? Maureen Dowd, New York Times Op-Ed columnist, stated in her March 27 vitriol (that is, column), that American bishops “should spend as much time guarding the kids already under their care as they do championing the rights of those who aren’t yet born.”
Perhaps Ms. Dowd should read The Monitor’s April 1st issue, pages six and seven specifically. (Editor’s Note – the reader refers to an editorial on the Church’s abuse prevention efforts in the United States, available here).
She also stated that the Church “might survive” if it were to, among other things, “invite women to be priests, nuns to be more emancipated and priests to marry.” Dowd ends her column by recommending that Pope Benedict “go home to Bavaria” and for the cardinals to elect a woman pope.
I am not one to challenge Ms. Dowd’s theological or sociological expertise, but women, though not as often, abuse minors as well, and being married hasn’t stopped generations of dads from sexually abusing their, and other people’s, children.
And Maureen, we simple, orthodox folk happen to have it on good authority that the Church will survive. There’s no “might” about it: The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against us.
So please, news organizations, if you are going to cover a story, get your facts straight. If the Catholic faith and Church life is foreign to you, take the time to learn about it. Report the true, whether it is good or bad, and leave out the false, whether it is bad or good. Be honest and be just. Then and only then will you have the respect of fair-minded people.
Then and only then will you be doing your job.
Andrew Faherty
Toms River
The Monitor welcomes your feedback. Selected letters may be published on our website or in our print edition. To submit your comments, click here