Journolism: The Credentialed Media Don’t Exactly Lie to Us, But They Conceal Politically Incorrect Facts in a Biased Manner

by

We have previously reported that today’s professional journalists rarely deliberately lie to us, but that they often omit rather important parts of the story. This was an Associated Press story, an ostensibly straight news piece, in which the writer managed to omit the most important part of the story. Read on and you’ll see why I frequently refer to journolists¹ as opposed to journalists!

How to deal with same-sex unions? It’s a question fracturing major Christian denominations.

It’s a dramatic illustration of how — in a religion that stresses God’s love for humanity — divisions over marriage, sexuality, and inclusion of gays and lesbians are proving insurmountable

by David Crary, Associated Press | Epiphany, January 7, 2024 | 10:25 AM EST

Catholics around the world are sharply divided by the Vatican’s recent declaration giving priests more leeway to bless same-sex couples. Supporters of LGBTQ inclusion welcome the move; some conservative bishops assail the new policy as a betrayal of the church’s condemnation of sexual relations between gay or lesbian partners.

Here’s the first bit of bias shown. Reporter David Crary, the head of the Associated Press’ 11-person religion coverage team, and someone who cannot reasonably be called uneducated on or unfamiliar with the subject, tells us that the ‘sides’ of the controversy are “Supporters of LBBTQ inclusion” versus “some conservative bishops,” as though there is not a significant part of the Catholic laity who see such as “a betrayal of the church’s condemnation of sexual relations between gay or lesbian partners.”

Strikingly, the flare-up of debate in Catholic ranks coincides with developments in two other international Christian denominations — the global Anglican Communion and the United Methodist Church — that are fracturing over differences in LGBTQ-related policies.

“A lot of denominations are in the position where you have to make a decision — you can’t be wishy-washy anymore,” said Burge, a specialist in religious demographics. “That’s the tension they’re facing: how to keep older conservatives in the fold while attracting younger people.”

For global denominations — notably Catholics, Anglicans and United Methodists — Burge sees another source of tension: Some of their biggest growth in recent decades has been in socially conservative African countries where same-sex relationships are taboo.

“African bishops have this ammunition,” Burge said. “They say to the West, ‘We’re the ones growing. You have the money, we have the numbers.’”

Mr Crary then goes through several paragraphs documenting the splits in several Protestant and Orthodox denominations, as well as major non-Christian faiths, which you can read at the linked original. If The Philadelphia Inquirer’s paywall stymies you, you can also read it at the AP original site.

While it appears to me that there is a bias on the part of the author in favor of approving homosexual unions, though the article is mostly written neutrally, there is one huge elephant in the room: how can any responsible and knowledgeable reporter write an article on this topic without mentioning that homosexual sex is absolutely forbidden in the Bible, in both the Old Testament, which is the sacred writing as far as Judaism is concerned, and the New, which Christians hold to be divinely inspired. How can Mr Crary write n this subject without mentioning Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, which not only condemn homosexual activity, but assign the death penalty for practitioners? How can he not note Matthew 5:17-18, Acts 15:20, Romans 1:27-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and 1 Timothy 9-10?

This is where Mr Crary’s report fails: if your only knowledge of the subject was what you read therein, you would come away thinking that this was a dispute wholly among political conservatives and liberals. The fact that the Bible specifically states that homosexual activity is seriously sinful would not be part of your knowledge in which to understand the dispute.

Mr Crary did not actually lie to his readers, but he omitted a hugely important fact, one which changes the impression his story gives, and one that is vitally important to the topic at hand. That is not good journalism.
__________________________________
¹ – The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
__________________________________
Follow me on Twitter! Check out my website, The First Street Journal, for stories not on American Free News network.
_________________________________

Follow AFNN:

1 thought on “Journolism: The Credentialed Media Don’t Exactly <i>Lie</i> to Us, But They Conceal Politically Incorrect Facts in a Biased Manner”

  1. I disagree. Reporters lie on purpose. The many flat out lies about what Trump said or didnt say are fairly well documented. And the lies about climate change vastly exceed the true statements. (no, co2 doesnt cause extreme weather, no extreme weather is not on the increase, no 2023 wasnt particulary unusual when it came to bad weather, no 2023 was not the warmest year in the last 125000, etc)

Leave a Comment