my 2 cents

Headlines Stirring the Pot

I don’t intend this as a political commentary, although some will surely see it as such.  I do have feelings on the issue, which will come out in this post.  But my intent in writing this is to focus on the journalistic aspects of what has become a hot-button issue.

 

The Islamic cultural center that’s proposed to be built in lower Manhattan has caused a lot of controversy, involving people all the way up to the President.  Yes, it’s a very sensitive subject since it hits close to home for thousands of people who lost loved ones in the World Trade Center attacks on 9/11.  But others who have no direct connection to the events of that day have been turning this into a political hot potato, and the media – including the mainstream media – have been helping to stir the pot.

There seem to be a few misconceptions that have been conveniently overlooked by conservative politicians, bloggers and some media.

·           *  The site for the proposed Islamic cultural center is NOT at Ground Zero. 

·            *  The proposed cultural center will be open to people of all religions and will have programs

        and activities to serve the broader community, not only Muslims.  It has been compared to

        the 92^nd Street Y, a Jewish facility that has both religious and non-religious programs open

        to all.

·            *  There are already several storefront mosques in the immediate area that provide places to 

        worship for Muslims who work downtown.

·            *  The imam at the proposed cultural center is known to be moderate and not supportive of

        radicals who promote terrorism.

But conservatives, supported both willingly and unknowingly, have been pushing the erroneous statements that the mosque will be at Ground Zero, that it will be a place that will foster further intolerance and terrorism, and that it follows the Muslim practice of building a mosque on sites of conquests.

According to a recent story on National Public Radio, FOX News was the first to call the proposed cultural center the “Ground Zero Mosque,” back in December.  That name took on a life of its own, it seems, after President Obama said Muslims, like all other religions in the U.S., should have the right to practice their beliefs.  New York’s Mayor Bloomberg has seen his popularity poll numbers slide since he’s come out in support of the cultural center.  He knows the imam there and is confident his intentions are right.

Conservative media have jumped all over this, and then mainstream media picked up on it, along with the unfortunate and inaccurate headline “Ground Zero Mosque.”

The Associated Press, which feeds news to some 1,500 newspapers and thousands of radio and TV newsrooms, let the headline "Ground Zero Mosque" slip into a story, even though the story, in the first paragraph, indicated it is two blocks away -- and not at Ground Zero.  The AP has since corrected itself, and most other media are now being more careful in their description of the location and the purpose of the cultural center.

But this episode shows, once again, how easily and dangerously the line can blur between legitimate, accurate news reporting and slanted, inaccurate and at times inflammatory "news" that quickly gets out online.  As I've written before, news media are under tremendous pressure now to get it out quickly.  But sometimes, it takes a bit of time to get accurate information, edit it clearly, and oversee the whole process to be sure it is fair, balanced and true.

The news media have always been and should continue to be the eyes and ears for the public, so they can be better informed -- especially at election time.  We can't afford to let the pressures of the 24/7 news cycle compromise the core values of good journalism.

 

Good television

I've been critical in this space of much programming that's on TV these days.  That includes news coverage, which too often is shallow and sensational -- ratings-driven so it sometimes resembles entertainment more than news.

But there is a lot of good journalism on TV.  The Peabody Awards, given out this week in New York, recognizes some of the best.

PBS, with public stations, led the networks in honors with four awards for reports done by "Frontline" (WGBH Boston), "Nova," "Independent Lens," and "Nature: Silence of the Bees" (WNET New York). CBS scored with "CBS Sunday Morning" and "60 Minutes."  A report by Christiane Amanpour about religious wars won a Peabody for CNN, and ABC won a Peabody for Bob Woodruff's report on "The Wounds of War." 

Local stations in Dallas, Phoenix, Pittsburgh and Roanoke, Va. also won top honors.

Trade journal Television Week has a good report on The Peabody's, with descriptions of each of the award winners.

So there is good journalism on TV after all.  You just have to look for it.

It's not about Oscar

We're a nation obsessed with superlatives, especially when it comes to media and entertainment.  Movies are judged by box office and how many Oscars they receive.  For TV, it's ratings and Emmys, and books are ranked by the best-seller lists of The New York Times and Amazon.

It's business, of course.  Writers, producers and directors need to make a living, so sales are important.  But there's a prestigious award that for 58 years has not been about being the biggest or selling the most.  It's the Christopher Awards, which are being celebrated this evening here in New York.

I've been working with The Christophers, a non-profit group, for several years, handling PR for their awards program.  There's no red carpet.  There aren't always big celebrity names attending.  It usually doesn't make Entertainment Tonight (not that I don't try).

The Christopher Awards are about content, not glamour and glitz.  They recognize screenwriters, producers, directors, authors and illustrators whose work in film, TV and cable, and books gets across a message we too often forget -- that each of us can make a difference in this world.

Some of this year's winners you've heard of -- films like Akeelah and the Bee and Miss Potter.  Others are smaller films that haven't enjoyed wide distribution -- Sophie Scholl: The Final Days, the story on an anti-Nazi activist in WWII Germany, or Water, which sheds light on an ancient Hindu tradition in India of requiring widows to live out their lives as social outcasts.

None of the books have been on the best-seller lists, yet they'll open your eyes to true-life tales of courage in the face of racial prejudice in the South, ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, or friendship in the midst of hatred and political tension between Jews and Arabs in the Middle East.

I always enjoy the Christopher Awards ceremony, which is elegantly low-key.  Presenters in recent years have included Charles Osgood, Cokie Roberts, James Earl Jones and Jacques d'Amboise.  But it's not about celebrity.  Everyone walks away from the evening feeling good.  It makes us realize there's lots of good out there and reason to be hopeful.

It's a good balance to the headlines we'll see on the 11 o'clock news when we get home.