More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Ingrid Mattson

GET UPDATES FROM Ingrid Mattson
 

Truthful Witnesses: Thanking God for Good Journalists

Posted: 03/22/11 03:00 PM ET

We religious leaders tend to complain a lot about the media. We lament the media's focus on trivial entertainment stories on the one hand, and on bad news stories on the other. We are particularly annoyed that bad news stories about religion receive a lot more coverage than the daily acts of love and compassion by the vast majority of religious people. We religious leaders sound like we understand about as much about the media as the media understands about religion.

So first, let's stop making broad generalizations about the media. We don't like it when people blame all of "religion" for the excesses or transgressions of a few, so we should stop doing the same for the media. Next, let's recognize that the media gives a reasonable amount of attention for good religion stories -- maybe not enough -- but there is some good reporting. The biggest problem is not the absence of stories about ordinary people doing good things, but the fact that these stories do not "stick" with people like bad news and the horror stories. This makes sense from a survival perspective: given our limited attention, shouldn't our brains more easily recall threats and dangers than benign and ordinary events?

This is why, incidentally, American Muslims face a particularly difficult challenge convincing other Americans that we are not a threat: the idea has been anchored in the minds of our fellow citizens by the real stories of terrorists acting in the name of Islam. The fact that there are so few of these people doesn't matter, because these stories stick in the mind, while good news stories do not. On the other hand, we are justified in criticizing certain media outlets for presenting as "experts" on Islam individuals who are, in fact, anti-Muslim activists or those whose only expertise is in putting themselves at the center of any controversy to increase their book sales and speaking fees. Responsible editorial control needs to be exercised, not to silence people, but to at least to distinguish for the viewer or reader the ideologically motivated activist from the more objective expert.

Finally, it is only fair that we recognize the extraordinarily important service many journalists provide bringing critical news to our attention. In the last few weeks especially, as the world has experienced major upheavals -- political revolutions and natural disasters -- courageous reporters have placed themselves in dangerous situations to let us know what was happening. Our ability to respond ethically to these situations depends on accurate information and truthful reporting. As I teach my ethics students, our principles are useless unless we first understand the reality of a situation. "What is happening?" necessarily precedes "then what should we do?"

During the Egyptian revolution, reporters were harassed, kidnapped, and even killed by the regime's henchmen. In Libya, it's still happening. The risks journalists take are very real; Reporters Without Borders http://en.rsf.org/ has extensive documentation of dozens of journalists killed last year. During military conflicts, native journalists are critical for their local knowledge and connections -- and they are the most vulnerable; often their reporting is done closer to danger zones and they don't have the protection of Western citizenship. I am in awe of their courage and commitment to reporting the truth.

Western reporters are also critical for helping Western audiences connect with events in other countries. These are "our" journalists -- not necessarily because of their ethnicity or their nationality (or because they are more objective -- that is a racist assumption) -- but because we spend so much time with them over the years as we watch them report the news. There is no doubt that some reporters make every story all about them, but the good ones try to avoid inserting themselves in the story. Nevertheless, we viewers become attached to them. As a consequence, we worry when we see Arwa Damon, Richard Engel, Anderson Cooper, Nic Robertson, and others standing among unruly crowds or in front of a night sky lit with falling rockets. By putting themselves in danger, they make us care more about places and people we might never have had occasion to think about before these conflicts. As we begin to care more about these stories, perhaps some of the artificial divisions between "our" and "their" reporters will disappear as well, and the value of simple truth-telling will be elevated.

The Abrahamic traditions uphold the importance of "witnessing;" false witness is prohibited and truthful testimony is required. Certainly there are unscrupulous reporters, but there are also many good journalists who have high ethical standards. Religious people should remember to say, "Thank God for good journalists," and just as importantly, because as the Prophet Muhammad taught, "Those who do not express their gratitude to people are not grateful to God," we should say "Thank you" to those dedicated to reporting the truth.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 24
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
03:09 PM on 03/23/2011
A nice article, I have been a critic of the media lately, but have to agree with much of your post. Thank you for the perspective. I also found your comment...

"On the other hand, we are justified in criticizing certain media outlets for presenting as "experts" on Islam individuals who are, in fact, anti-Muslim activists or those whose only expertise is in putting themselves at the center of any controversy to increase their book sales and speaking fees.""

To be incredibly on point. The media does that all the time. They will have a person supporting the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell on one side, and on the other, they will have a person from an anti-gay group that has no military knowledge, and their only qualification is that they hate gays. It's an easy cop out for them and that type of journalism as you rightly point out, needs to stop.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:47 AM on 03/23/2011
Repost:

Like every other news junkie, I am glad that someone wants the job of reporting what is happening in dangerous places.

We must keep in mind that there are subjects about which there is precious little objective reporting. At the intersection of religion and politics there is zero objective reporting, in my experience. Each reader is, like it or not, forced to sift out the slant in the reporting. Israel/Palestine comes to mind. Islam in America is another.

Dr. Mattson's slant is obvious. She is the immediate past president of the leading Islamist institution in America.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Sandlin
We see the world not as it is, but as we are.
07:47 PM on 03/23/2011
Why do you call her institution Islamist?

Also, why do you say she has a "slant" -- her comments seem quite straightforward to me.

Do you disagree that many people hold a distorted and error-based view of Muslims, based upon their relying solely on the media for their information about Muslims and Islam?

In case you've missed it: that's empirically and observably true.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:24 PM on 03/23/2011
ISNA's relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood is pretty easy to find... and her comments would seem okay to a person who doubts the existence of political Islam in America.

Sure there are distorters and deliberate liars about Islam. What's new? Pick an organization, someone will lie about it. You come to the conclusion that all the criticism of Islam is anti-Muslim--you just can't find any legitimate criticism that is not Islamophobic. Isn’t that a little extreme?

I ask you what I asked in another comment here--who are the critics of Islam who are not Islamophobic?
03:28 PM on 03/24/2011
Good, Doug; I agree.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ilm101
11:45 PM on 03/23/2011
How is Dr. Mattson article considered to be slanted? It is just an honest assessment of some news reporters placing their lives on the line to bring us the news and we should all appreciate and admire them for that.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ingrid-mattson/truthful-witnesses-the-vi_b_838833.html#
08:12 PM on 03/22/2011
As we should thank those dedicated to reporting the truth, we should also thank YOU, Sister Ingrid, for a refreshing and thought-provoking article. Keep bringin' it.
photo
ShawnaAtteberry
Writer, Theologian
07:37 PM on 03/22/2011
Thank you for this intelligent post on the importance of journalism. I tend to get cynical about it, and this was a good reminder to be thankful for all the news and information I do have, and can get hold of easily, thanks to all the good reporters.
photo
living lightning
Knowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.
07:16 PM on 03/22/2011
Great article Dr.Mattson - thanks a lot.
05:56 PM on 03/22/2011
I wholeheartedly agree with you. As an American Muslim journalist (managing editor of Azizah Magazine), I am acutely aware of the various nuances of truth-management by the media. Some, like CNN, are quite good; others are terrible, and still others use innuendo, and hushed tones of voice to convey misrepresentation.

We have some excellent, relaxed reasonable voices in our American Muslim community who can even inject a little humor to lighten angry rhetoric. We also have Jon Stewart (a Jew) and Stephen Colbert (a Catholic) who help to balance inaccurate rhetoric about us.

And, we have Soledad O'Brien, who certainly presents a balanced picture, then invites comment. I have just viewed a preview copy of her documentary, "The Muslims Next Door", and parts of it are chilling. Reactions of some people in Murfreesboro to the proposed building of a community center are parallel to tactics of the Ku Klux Klan, which I remember vividly as a white Southern girl who grew up Catholic.

It is not only journalists -- the media -- who are responsible for telling the truth again and again. We are also responsible for the way we are defined. Like it or not, we must keep correcting misrepresentations wherever we see them -- through social media. We must unrelentingly address directly, journalists, bloggers, hate-mongerers (even among our own people) with respectful references to the truth. If we don't, we allow Islamophobia to continue; we invite others to define us as they like, without regard to truth or
08:03 PM on 03/22/2011
...without regard to truth or accuracy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:57 AM on 03/23/2011
Who are the critics of Islam who are not Islamopobic?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Ingrid Mattson
02:03 PM on 03/23/2011
That's a good question Jan. I criticize certain interpretations of Islam and others are free to do so as well. I would just hope that such people are open to rational discussion, and do not launch ad hominem attacks on Muslims, rather than engage in an honest discussion. For example, in your comments above you say "Dr. Mattson's slant is obvious. She is the immediate past president of the leading Islamist institutio­n in America." Rather than engage with my significant body of writings and lectures, you call me an "Islamist." Can you define your term? I understand the term "Islamist" to usually apply to groups who want some kind of state establishment of religion. That is something that neither I nor ISNA endorse. I realize that there are legions of people on the internet who make that claim, so I can excuse your confusion on that matter. I encourage you to read what ISNA does on its website: www.isna.net. However, I am no longer president, having completed my two term limit (a good practice of democracies that we embraced long ago!). So if you want to know what I lecture about, you can follow me here or read some other articles on my Hartford Seminary webpage: http://macdonald.hartsem.edu/articles.htm#mattson.
07:54 PM on 03/23/2011
They would be people who can make constructive, reasoned criticism of the cultural aspects which are not perfect -- but to be legitimate, the criticism must be based on fact, not suppositions or inferences. It's a tricky position, possibly best tackled by Muslims themselves; and, believe me, we do criticize when we see the need. So, your answer: Muslims themselves.
05:45 PM on 03/22/2011
A very nice article! If we wish to affect how religion is seen, it is important that believers speak and be heard.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
The Knocker
a mind is a terrible thing to waste
02:59 PM on 03/22/2011
"we are justified in criticizing certain media outlets for presenting as "experts" on Islam individuals who are, in fact, anti-Muslim activists or those whose only expertise is in putting themselves at the center of any controversy to increase their book sales and speaking fees."

Perhaps is the reason why we haven't seen the likes of you not invited by the main-stream media, (except for HP), to share your expertise and past experienced with their viewers. Also, this should quell the voices of those claim and answer the question why we don't hear much from Muslim intellectuals and leaders who speaks out against extremist.

Thank you for a very insightful and thought provoking article and I couldn't agree with more. We must be indeed grateful to those reporters who place their lives on the line to present the truth what is happening around the world.