For Wilshire Baptist Church
On a recent evening I enjoyed a first-time Zoom gathering with faculty and alumni from Baylor’s Department of Journalism, Public Relations and New Media. It was good to hear what the department is doing, chat with a couple of folks from my era, and listen to what some younger people are doing in the prime of their careers. As the department title indicates, there is a lot of “new media” that didn’t exist when I was learning the ropes in what was then just the Journalism Department.
With that in mind, I asked the faculty what they are doing to keep standards and processes of real journalism alive in an era when there are so many people out there practicing what they think is journalism. I’m mostly talking about Facebook and Twitter, but also about news and information outlets that are more about promoting agendas and opinions. My question got a good response, with the promise that every day the students are pressed to ask themselves as they report and write: Is it accurate? Is it fair? Does it cover all sides of the story?
I was glad to hear that, because that is not what I am reading and hearing in the media today, especially in the realms of politics and public policy. And with the horrible yet perfect storm of Covid-19, the presidential election and the George Floyd tragedy, the fires are hot and the cauldrons are boiling over. One of the faculty members said he believes that news and journalism have become so out of whack that the pendulum must and will swing back toward the good. I told him I hope and pray that is the case.
But the same questions could be asked in other areas of our culture that are being torn apart by the fact that anyone who has a computer or device can jump into a conversation and pronounce whatever they want as the gospel truth. And often the measure for what is true is nothing more than who shouts the loudest and gets the most clicks. In other words, consensus and opinion count more than truth.
One area that irritates me in this regard is science, where I often read the phrase, “the consensus of scientists is . . .” I thought that science was governed by “empirical evidence” through the gathering of data and facts. If scientists disagree, then aren’t they supposed to do their own research and collect their own data to prove their point?
More baffling to me is what’s happening in the realm of religion, theology and spirituality, where people are shamed and shouted down for their beliefs. I thought that in the absence of empirical evidence, the Holy Spirit was the guide on those matters. I thought this was the one place where free thinking was sacrosanct; where if we disagree with someone, we can tell them but then allow them room to live their belief unless it is physically, emotionally or psychologically dangerous to others. But instead, some of the most learned thinkers out there use their pulpits and platforms to bully and belittle each other. I don’t understand that at all.
Still, nothing I’ve just said is fact. It’s all just my opinion. Feel free to take it or leave it.