Published February 18, 2006
IN THEORY
Q: A panel of Washington journalists was to convene this week to discuss coverage of religion in the media. The goal was to have a conversation about the pitfalls and the positives that coverage of faith issues brings. What do you think are some of the pros and cons of general coverage of religion in the media? What does it do well? What can it do better?
A: This is certainly an appropriate time to have such discussion. There is a religious dimension to just about everything in the news these days and if there isn't, it seems that there's someone ready to put a sacred twist on the profane.
When it comes to reporting stories, I feel an extra effort is made to emphasize the religious component to the story, perhaps because of the incongruity between bad news and the supposed good nature of the religious. For instance, a sexual molester is a bad person, whether he be a priest, a rabbi, a contractor, a plumber, a lawyer or an architect. His crime against the victim and against society is neither augmented nor diminished by his vocation. Yet, the religious twist is always an added feature, which makes for good copy.
I'm pleased that this discussion will be criticizing, and therefore evaluating media perceptions. Criticism -- and even more self-criticism -- brings evaluation and change for the better. It is part of the evolutionary process, in this case the evolution of journalism in a very spiritually-conscious era.
The next challenge will be for a little self-criticism and self-evaluation by religions and the institutions that represent them.
FR. VAZKEN MOVSESIAN
Armenian Church
Youth Ministries
No comments:
Post a Comment