I’d like to start a thread to glean opinions on what Catholic publications are reliable and faithful and which seem less than Catholic, as if they have an axe to grind or worse. And the one I’ll start with is an email “newsletter” called CathNewsUSA. While it is free, it is also, in my opinion, offensive. It seems to rejoice when there is bad news for the hierarchy, and to gloat when the dissenters are given a pat on the head. I particularly note its inflammatory headline words, which skew the “news” aspect into non-recognition. But even a neutral headline, will often be followed by a negative first sentence pop-up.
To illustrate I’ll just post some headlines from today’s emailing, and put in red the words which seem “negative” in building perception, and in blue the words which have a more positive spin. Then I’ll mix a few together to show how the context and perception can be manipulated. Whenever NEWS departs into OPINION, of course the same risks are encountered. What do you think? And which publications do you particularly trust? or particularly shun?
“Activists gather to plot defense of ‘religious liberty’”
Note that activists make it seem like a splinter group; plot sounds devious and ‘religious liberty’ in quotes make it sound unreal. Would Faithful Catholics gather to plan defense of Freedom of Religion sound quite so nefarious? Bigger question: Why is CathNewsUSA sounding supportive of squelching freedom of religion?
“ Vatican bank chief ousted with no-confidence vote, failed to do job, Vatican says “
Aha! one of those big vatican people brought down? But by bank overseers, not the Vatican.
“Catholics caught between bishops, Obama’s birth control ” This is followed by the opening sentences: “A small group of very conservative bishops has hijacked the church, or at least the public voice of the church. They are playing the role of the authoritarian father. In case after case, their message to the Catholic faithful is “Do it because I say so.””
ALSO: not HHS mandate? Not sterilization or abortion-drug mandate? Obviously this news spin contributes to the secular perception that it is all about birth control, not about freedom!
“Church of England nears vote on women bishops” — a seemingly neutral headline? Followed by:
“The Church of England paved the way on Thursday for a final vote on women bishops to go ahead in July, but supporters angry at last-minute concessions to traditionalists who favour an all-male clergy immediately threatened to scupper it.” Oh, my, the CathNews is quite obvious in this opinion. Supporters are good, concessions are bad?
In my opinion, CathNews is a waste of cyberspace. It’s tag line claims: “Bringing you the best of Catholic Media in the United States.” Wonder which bishop has given them permission to fly under the Catholic banner? Or did they hijack the name too?
I also find the comment section at the end of each post to be a hotbed of dissenters, full of hostility, negativity, sarcasm and angst. Faithfulness, obedience and caring for souls I don’t often find there.
|
You muse: Wonder which bishop has given them permission to fly under the Catholic banner?
I don’t think “permission” is needed. Just look at all the so-called “Catholic” colleges and organizations that use that description, not to mention prominent people. What is surprising (and unconscionable) is that such publications and colleges and organizations are not roundly condemned by the bishops and priests, or at least called out as frauds. Some few are, but few people in the pews know it, because at the parish level nothing is ever said. Rather, our leaders, for the most part, are silent, always silent. Gentle approach? I would give their approach a different adjective. +JMJ
I think use of the word “Catholic” is what some bishop used against RealCatholicTV to try to get them squashed. Also, isn’t there a canon law that requires approval to use the word Catholic as an identifier of an organization?
Once the Catholic OPhysician’s Guild freed itself from diocesan influence, the bishop forbaid them using the word “Catholic”. So they called it “The St. Luke’s Physician’s Guild”.