Friday 21 September 2012
Monday 17 September 2012
op/ed-integrity in journalism-update
Time for an update on my ongoing issue with Newschasers of Moncton New Brunswick.I've finally heard from them on the matter of journalistic ethics.Well,sort of.While they have seemed to be uninclined to answer me directly as to why they are supporting the actions of their fellow director with regard to the slander she has put forth in the past,their actions speak loudly and articulately.
You see,a while back these people posted a very self congratulatory video on Youtube extolling the virtues of what it is they do.I had the unmitigated gall to post some very direct comments criticizing their actions.It is,I said,and I reiterate here,shameful that they have not dealt directly with the mess on their own doorstep.It diminishes their credibility if indeed such a word could ever have been applied to them in the first place.
Now truthfully,I don't really care all that much about the slander directed at me.The documented evidence fully supports my position,a fact that Newschasers can feel free to examine with my full permission.But the people who follow this media outlet have every right to know what they are wasting their time on.They have every right to know what this agency seemingly stands for.They need to know that at least one of the agency's directors has an ongoing issue with a family member regarding an accusation that was put forth without any effort to confirm the facts stated by this director.They need to know that the directorship of Newschasers does not want to deal with this mess on their doorstep.At least they have not done so until now.They need to know this so as to be able to make a reasonable value judgement as to what this agency stands for.
While Newschasers have not addressed my concerns,let me tell you what they have done in response to today's editorial,admittedly one that pulls no punches.They simply pulled the plug.Buried their heads in the sand.Barred me from accessing their Youtube channel.Well,that's their right.But why are these people so sensitive to dissent?Most legitimate news agencies accommodate dissent and many actually welcome it.Not so with Newschasers.Could it be that they have no clue how to answer the issue put before them,being,after all essentially ambulance chasers?It really looks as if they don't actually have a policy regarding ethics at all.But I may be mistaken.I just wish they would explain their position to me in that regard.Instead of simply pulling the plug.Isn't that what they do in Iran or China?
One thing that Newschasers can be assured of.If they wish to clarify who they are,they can always respond,in the manner of their own choosing on this blog.Unlike some,my shoulders will bear the load,even if I disagree with what they say.They,or anyone else will not be silenced here for their opinion.So perhaps they would like to respond,because in the absence of any response,I have a fairly clear vision as to who these people are and I am not afraid to lay shame at their door.
The best way to deal with the heat may just be to put out the fire.
You see,a while back these people posted a very self congratulatory video on Youtube extolling the virtues of what it is they do.I had the unmitigated gall to post some very direct comments criticizing their actions.It is,I said,and I reiterate here,shameful that they have not dealt directly with the mess on their own doorstep.It diminishes their credibility if indeed such a word could ever have been applied to them in the first place.
Now truthfully,I don't really care all that much about the slander directed at me.The documented evidence fully supports my position,a fact that Newschasers can feel free to examine with my full permission.But the people who follow this media outlet have every right to know what they are wasting their time on.They have every right to know what this agency seemingly stands for.They need to know that at least one of the agency's directors has an ongoing issue with a family member regarding an accusation that was put forth without any effort to confirm the facts stated by this director.They need to know that the directorship of Newschasers does not want to deal with this mess on their doorstep.At least they have not done so until now.They need to know this so as to be able to make a reasonable value judgement as to what this agency stands for.
While Newschasers have not addressed my concerns,let me tell you what they have done in response to today's editorial,admittedly one that pulls no punches.They simply pulled the plug.Buried their heads in the sand.Barred me from accessing their Youtube channel.Well,that's their right.But why are these people so sensitive to dissent?Most legitimate news agencies accommodate dissent and many actually welcome it.Not so with Newschasers.Could it be that they have no clue how to answer the issue put before them,being,after all essentially ambulance chasers?It really looks as if they don't actually have a policy regarding ethics at all.But I may be mistaken.I just wish they would explain their position to me in that regard.Instead of simply pulling the plug.Isn't that what they do in Iran or China?
One thing that Newschasers can be assured of.If they wish to clarify who they are,they can always respond,in the manner of their own choosing on this blog.Unlike some,my shoulders will bear the load,even if I disagree with what they say.They,or anyone else will not be silenced here for their opinion.So perhaps they would like to respond,because in the absence of any response,I have a fairly clear vision as to who these people are and I am not afraid to lay shame at their door.
The best way to deal with the heat may just be to put out the fire.
Sunday 16 September 2012
How not to be a Christian!!!
It's not so much that "Reverend" Phelps runs down my country with accusations that are not factual that disturbs me ,though that is bad enough.By the way,it is not true that it is a crime to read the Bible or worship as we see fit in Canada,so "Reverend"you stand corrected.It is truth that we have laws that limit freedom of speech in such a way as to not permit it's being used to incite hatred against others,thus causing them to more vulnerable to violence and abuse of their human rights.Simply put,that is reasonable.And,"Reverend",where is your connection between"fags"and the faults you see with our country?Oh,right,I forgot,there is no connection.The whole argument is not founded on logical discourse but on something that has become a bit of a fixation with you and your church.
No,I can live with your right to speak freely,even if I would never use my own freedom to do the things you so freely do with yours.And every time I see you I thank God that he has given you the ability to so clearly articulate your ignorance.
The problem with this sort of preaching is that it diminishes Christian ministry in the eyes of a world that we are taught to care for and hold in prayer.But "Reverend"Phelps does not understand any of that.You see,the binding of his Bible must be faulty,as it seems only to open as far as Leviticus 18.Don't get me wrong,you should read Leviticus 18 and take it to heart,but it seems to me that we are told that all scripture is for our benefit.So what is the point of founding a ministry on a single phrase of scripture.What is the point of reading Leviticus 18 if you do not also read John 3:16 and then proceed to 1st Corinthians 13?In fact,the "Reverend"has seemingly not even taken all of Leviticus 18 to heart.I'm referring of course to the warning at the end of that chapter that says"for I AM The Lord."
Yes,"Reverend"Phelps,it's time you let God be God and either repent of taking
his name in vain or quietly fade into the dark recesses of history.When I read John 3:16,I believe it to apply to the whole world,just as God says it does.That being the case,it is logically inconsistent to preach the message "God hates fags"That is not a gospel message.So,every time you hear it you can,and should translate it directly as "Reverend Phelps hates fags"The problem with that sort of preaching is that "Reverend"Phelps is on the outside looking in when it comes to the whole of scripture.Christian witness can and should be a response to God's assurance that He loves all of mankind despite the fact that we all sin and fall short of his glory.What I don't hear from Phelps is a response to Gods love in his life.I only hear hatred,directed at a particular group of sinners,and mindless of his own sin.
The secular world views Christians as right wing zealots,intolerant of any views other than their own.It seemingly never occurs to them that there are many among us that are informed by enlightened values not rooted in the thirteenth century."Reverend"Phelps certainly confirms such opinions on the part of the public.But,in fact,the scriptures instruct us to,among other things walk humbly with God.In the name of doing just that "Reverend" Phelps might look to the example of Abraham at the time of Sodom and Gommorah.But,sadly,instead of being willing to make intercession for sinners,"Reverend" Phelps seems to look eagerly forward to their destruction.How unfortunate to take such a view when you yourself are to be counted among the unrighteous.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)