Sunday, August 10, 2014

Unbalanced Journalism


It appears that the Pacific Daily News favors Tim Rohr, Chuck White and their followers.  Below is a weblink of Chuck Whites article in the Pacific Daily News, dated Monday August 4, 2014.  Even the title of his article was not changed.  There was no complaint from Chuck White about anything in his article that was edited.    

The Way Shows Signs of A Cult Or Sect


Now below is Tim Rohr's story from the Pacific Daily News entitled "Why Strawman Fallacy was used" dated July 31, 2014.  The title of his submitted article is the same as it is printed on his blog site. There was also no complaint anywhere from Tim Rohr about his article being edited, which was submitted to the PDN.

Why Strawman Fallacy was used

The complaints, however, came from the NCW.  The interview with Father Pius was edited.  Mr. Pablo Aglubat's article was also edited and the TITLE of the article was changed.  As for Dr. Rick Eusebio, his article was also edited, and apparently even the title of his article was changed.  Now, why are article titles signficant?  Because the title always indicates what the article is really about and distinguishes it from other articles.  It is the main point of focus on what the article discusses.  

In Chuck White's article, the title is in conformity with what he discussed.  In fact, Chuck White even enumerate these signs.  It was also the same in Rohr's article, in which he also enumerates the fallacies that were used.  

The titles of Mr. Aglubat's and Dr. Eusebio's were changed.  Mr. Agulbat's article actually had to do with the Neocatechumenal Way being called a "sect".  He started his article by describing Mr. White calling the Way a sect and concluded toward the end by stating:  An ecclesial reality sanctioned and lauded by all the Popes cannot be a sect.  Unless....also the last four Popes belonged to a sect.  This is simple as ABC.  This goes for the Way as well as for the Guild.  

The same thing was also done with Dr. Eusebio's article.  If his article is really about the misconceptions of the Way as the title suggests, then why did he start his article with a story about transparent truth and human perception?  Why not simply enumerate the many misconceptions? 

In addition to changing the title of his article, words were also ADDED, which changes the entire meaning of what was being said.  The PDN article stated (the highlighted part shows the added words):  The most glaring and frustrating fact is through all these attacks, criticisms and malicious gossip, the effort to answer our problems of divorce, suicide, single-parent families and bringing back the faraway Catholics, has been buried deep in the recesses of our volcanic emotions. 

Dr. Eusebio's original letter stated:  The most glaring and  frustrating fact is through all these attacks, criticisms and malicious gossip, there has never been a single proposal to answer our problems of divorce, suicide, single parent families and bringing back the faraway catholic.

What is most interesting is that while his son worked for the Pacific Daily News, he had to messaged me through my blog because his father's article was grossly edited.  I would think that since PDN had Rohr's daughter and Eusebio's son, the PDN would have been objective.  Apparently, Tim Rohr and Chuck White has more influence over PDN.  Consider these two events:    

1.   There was a soap opera exit of Monsignor James with TV cameras on and a blog invitation to go to the Cathedral to witness his exit.  And sure enough, the media was there.  

2.  Deleting and adding words in the article as well as changing the titles submitted to the media by the NCW while Mr. Rohr, and Mr. White goes unedited.  I would not be surprised if the articles submitted by Monsignor James and Richard Untalan also go unedited.   


9 comments:

  1. How do you know that the pieces by Tim Rohr and Chuck White were not edited? Do you have their original submissions to make the comparison? Maybe neither of them complained about their articles being edited because they understand that is part of the editorial process and they accept that reality.

    Your timeline is off. Your claim that the "soap opera exit of Monsignor James" was covered because of the "blog invitation to go to the Cathedral" is only part of the story. The information was first mentioned on Facebook and then on Tim Rohr's blog. I was reading a post on Jungle Watch when I got a Facebook notification about photos and video taken by Bernadette Sterne Meno of Msgr. James leaving. Several minutes later the "blog invitation" appeared.

    The media also goes wherever they think a good story is developing. That's the reality of the media.

    BTW: Why have you not covered Fr. Adrian's appearance along with Ric A. Eusebio on The Big Show with Travis Coffman on Friday afternoon, 4-6 PM? Isn't that newsworthy? Travis let them stay 2 hours when the day before he had Chuck White for only 1 hour. Travis let him go at 5 PM. Did Chuck White complain that he was only given 1 hour while Fr. Adrian got 2 hours? If so I missed it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:04 a.m.,

      Not only did they not complain about it, they proudly displayed it on their blog site. I never said that the soap opera media coverage was because of the blog invitation. I said, there was a soap opera exit of Monsignor James with TV cameras on AND a blog invitation to go to the Cathedral to witness his exit. And sure enough, the media was there. It is amazing that the blog invitation was given only a few minutes all in the same day.

      Why I did not cover Father Adrian's appearance along with Ric A. Eusebio?? Because I do not have the transcript of that show. I do not STEAL. It is always preferable to ask permission from the parties involved.

      Delete
  2. The tltle of this blog is Unbalanced Journalism anonymous. PDN may not be responsible in how the public interprets the facts of a story but the are responsibility to report all the facts. In respect to the church, the Good News doesn't sell newspapers, in this case, maybe controversy, drama, soap opera's does. We see people who are interviewed on subjects like the Neocatechumenal Way who have absolutely no experience or first hand knowledge of this charism of the Church. In reporting these stories that represents a clearly bias and personal opinion, PDN stops being responsible and objective. PDN is now no better than a tabloid newspaper. I will pray for Ms. Rohr to go back to her peers in Vibes. I will also pray for PDN to support Vibes in researching why DYA is over flowing, why family court is overwhelmed, why CPS is in near if not in crisis already, why our young adults are committing suicide, why our young teenage girls are having babies....why they are abandoned by thier boyfriends whose parent's blame only the girl... I can go on and on.

    ReplyDelete
  3. By purposely changing the TITLE of an article, it detracts the reader away from the main idea of what the author wrote. And to add words and phrases that did not exist in the original article written by the author reeks of yellow journalism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jungle changed title to its blog. Paper changed title to editorial opinion. Maybe because theirs a common goal...attack the Church through the Way and keep the Jungle from looking like the sad desperate instigator that it is.  

      Delete
  4. You mean like this Diana? http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-backs-neocatechumenal-way-liturgy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:21 p.m.,

      On the contrary, that is a balanced news report, and we have the letter to prove it. It is found here in this weblink below. The letter is consistent with what is in the news report:

      http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/archbishop-angelo-becciu-s-letter-to-kiko-arguello

      Delete
  5. No fair ground in media here on Guam is like third world country.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Double sided
    https://www.facebook.com/catholicsguam/photos/a.1451985555073956.1073741829.1450912311847947/1451985078407337/?type=1&relevant_count=1

    ReplyDelete