There is just a hint of Coriolanus going before the plebs here. The notion that the news media is a secularist cabal ignoring stories that challenge its shibboleths is wrongheaded. Yet cultural religionists imply that the absence of religious commitment in the nation’s newsrooms-and consequent acceptance of baby-killing, oops abortion, is among the reasons that the Gosnell story was overlooked. People with religious convictions may read their passions into it, but Gosnell did not seem to be motivated one way or the other by a faith commitment. The Gosnell story is not a religion story, it’s a crime story. Making more Americans aware of religion and historical incidents like an anti-Hindu press - a history of which I was not aware - would not have mattered in the Gosnell story as:
Yet, I’m not convinced that improving the American educational system is really at the heart of Cannon’s plaint about religion coverage and his subsequent post on Kermit Gosnell. Religion is absent from many high school curricula and university classrooms, and many of us barely know the religious history of our own country much less the role of religion worldwide. Trained religion reporters, but rather Americans’ widespread ignorance about religion.
I MASTER OF MY DOMAIN TRIAL
Menken’s critique of Fundamentalism in his account of the Scope’s “monkey” trial or the “anti-Hindu coverage that ran through Western newspapers in the 1910s and 1920s.” The crux of her argument is that the problem is not a lack of: In support of this contention, the article offers historical examples purporting to show the press has always done a poor job - missing stories, printing pablum in place of news or voicing prejudice such as H.L.
0 kommentar(er)
