;){kind=logo}
tagged: Baptist Press, bias, Dave Miller, GCR, Great Commission Resurgence, media, news, news media, press, SBC NewsWhat Baptist Press’ Anti-GCR Bias Teaches Us
Posted by Dave Miller in Baptist Life
The debate surrounding the Great Commission Resurgence has made one thing perfectly clear – we do not really have a Baptist Press – we have a public relations arm for Morris Chapman and the Executive Committee. Dr. Chapman has been one of the harshest and most vocal critics of the work of the Task Force. Baptist Press has joined the chorus of negativity. Any effort at balanced reporting has given way to a barrage of “Chicken Little” articles telling us that if the GCR Report passes the SBC sky will fall.
During the Conservative Resurgence, Baptist Press was an enthusiastic ally of the moderate side. There was little attempt at balance in the reporting as we were subjected to a torrent of articles regaling us with the evils of the CR and the heroism of those who opposed it. As a conservative, I resented the slanted reporting in my state paper. Then, when we became a voting majority on the boards and agencies, we had the opportunity to change things. We could have set up Baptist Press as an independent SBC news agency. But instead of that, we just substituted one bias for another. Baptist Press still serves as a public relations arm for the agencies and boards, not as an independent news agency.
Anyone who is interested can do what I did – I went through Baptist Press’ listing of articles about the GCR and labeled them as neutral, pro-GCR or anti-GCR. The listing of the articles is available on Baptist Press’ website. What I found was both interesting and a little disturbing.
- Many of the articles were simply press reports by the Task Force or by Baptist agencies that were reprinted in full. There was no analysis, just a reprint of press releases.
- One trend I found troubling. Coverage of Morris Chapman’s reaction to the GCRTF was written by employees of the Executive Committee. A “news” piece about Jerry Rankin’s reaction to the report was written by an IMB employee. Agency employees do not engage in journalism; they do public relations – that’s not really a criticism; its an observation. Its okay for the EC or the IMB to issue press releases. I wonder if “Baptist Press” shouldn’t do more than just published press releases.
- There were many opinion pieces about the GCR. They did publish articles by Danny Akin, Ronny Floyd and others from the GCRTF. But the opinion articles were weighted pretty dramatically to the negative side. And the shrill tone of many of the negative articles was clear. It seems pretty clear that the point-of-view of Baptist Press is decidedly anti-GCR.
- You do not get much news from Baptist Press unless it reflects well on the SBC. Often, we have to go to ABP to read news about the SBC. Of course, that agency tends to have an anti-SBC bias, but at least they give information.
- The unfortunate reality is that blogs tend to serve as the news-reporting agency of the SBC. That is a problem because sometimes innuendo and gossip is published as fact. One blogger “broke a story” about how SWBTS was going to fire all of its Calvinist professors. The seminary denied the story (even Calvinist professors at SWBTS denied it) and no profs were ever fired. The blogger, of course, claimed that his report was what stopped the firings, but we are left with little more in that episode but innuendo and gossip. Blog reporting tends to be less than reliable. Unfortunately, because Baptist Press is not a true press agency, the blogs are often our only source of information.
- Timmy Brister at “Provocations and Pantings” has written an excellent article analyzing the bias of Bob Terry and the Alabama Baptist press. Bob Terry has been one of the most vocal critics of the GCRTF and has made little attempt at balance. What Brister demonstrates concerning Alabama’s press is reflected in the national Baptist press as well.
The Baptist Press We Need
I have written this today out of my frustration at the obvious bias of Baptist Press throughout the GCR debate. Danny Akin and others have noted the same problem. Baptist Press has joined forces with those who wish to defeat the GCR. I wish our Baptist Press reported news and made some attempt at balance. They do not. So, what should we do about it?
- We do not need the kind of adversial press that we see in national politics, nor to replicate the “gotcha” journalism we see so often from CNN, MSNBC, Fox and the rest.
- But we do need a press that is independent from the agencies it reports on. Articles about the IMB shouldn’t be written by IMB employees, should they? Couldn’t we have a Baptist Press that reflects more than a viewpoint vehicle for Morris Chapman, or for Frank Page in the future.
- Those of us who were annoyed by the bashing we received from Baptist Press in CR days should demand more from it today. We need an agency that is viewed as a news reporting agency and is more than just a press release clearinghouse.
- I am not meaning to criticize the people who work for Baptist Press. They are doing their jobs. BP is meant to be a public relations arm for the agencies and entities of the SBC. I just wish we aspired to something greater than that.
That’s my opinion. Tell me yours.
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
I’ll be working outdoors today at a church rummage sale (yeah, lots of fun). Will respond to comments later in the day.
Members of the Task Force have noted this as well, hence the use of Between the Times by Dr. Akin and others to publish their own responses and link to others as well.
Dave,
For at least the second time, we actually agree. Baptist Press is biased against the GCR and, for that matter, so is The Alabama Baptist. I’m not particularly upset about the editorial stance of either organization since I happen to agree with them. I also am realistic enough to admit that every news organization will be slanted. I know what I’m going to get on CNN vs. FOX. I know what I’m going to get if I read a “Slate” article vs. a “National Review” article. I urge people to read a number of different sources to stay informed.
By the way, the most balanced treatment, in my view, is the Trevin Wax post entitled “GCR in a Nutshell.” But be sure to read Morris Chapman’s PERSPECTIVE post as well. I’m sure you know where to find it.
Blogging really has leveled the playing field, so to speak. It would be interesting to see a study on how many people, in the SBC, read Baptist Press, how many read APB, and how many read blogs. I imagine there are a certain amount of folks who only read news related to the SBC on hard-copy state papers. But, then, there are a number who read mostly on the internet, and from a variety of different sources.
In my own case, I can say that reading blogs has increased my interest in and awareness of denominational issues. And, it has also led me to read Baptist Press much more than I did beforehand.
All in all, I think it is a good thing to read publications that represent a variety of different points of view, being aware of the particular perspective each one is coming from, and develop your own opinions accordingly.
Josh,
Yes, Between the Times has produced a book full of materials that support the GCR. Blogs are, by nature, point-of-view.
Of course, my point is that I wish BP were more journalistic and less institutional.
Rick, miracles happen.
Dave, what are the chances BP picks up this article?
I’m not too exercised about Baptist Press. As others have noted, most of us get our Baptist news from many sources. The call for an independent BP was sounded a few decades ago…by moderates and liberals. Maybe they were right.
I recommend every Southern Baptist get the news feed from Associated Baptist Press, the moderate news outfit. You will get some important news that would never see the light of day on BP.
I also think BP should absolutely do some ‘gotcha’ and some investigative journalism. I doubt it will happen and bloggers have filled in some of the need for that.
Josh, about the same as Tiger Woods reaching his 50th anniversary with Elin.
William, any chance you and I ever voted for the same candidate during the CR?
Seriously, it is good we have blogging now to bypass the point-of-view and selectivity of BP. But the problem with blogging, of course, is the lack of accuracy (ie – the “Calvinists are fired” debacle at SWBTS) and the tendency to put point of view ahead of facts. I’d like BP to be somewhere between blogging and the current propaganda tool.
Dave,
When talking to laymen in our church, I do not think they read anything these people write. How would the church be affected if they are not involved in any of the convention issues? I think my parents received information from the convention when I was a kid but I do not see that very much anymore. Somehow, I got my name in the local association mailing list and receive information from them that causes me to think we waste our money. Other than that, I suppose we as local churches must consider what we support financially and why. Sure wouldn’t want to be accused of wasting any of God’s money. I’m sure He has a pretty good accounting system, too.
Dave,
“Josh, about the same as Tiger Woods reaching his 50th anniversary with Elin.”
LOL- I think I laughed an ongoing 8 minutes when I read that. I even had to come back at a later time to comment. Absolutely hilarious!
Glad I could help, Matt.
By the way, during the CR, I was in Virginia. The Iowa Baptist Convention made a decision years ago to be apolitical. Our state paper did not take positions on political hot-button issues in the SBC.
I just wanted to make clear that it was Virginia and Texas state papers that I referenced in my article.
Great article, I hope this viewpoint is reflected in the future direction of Baptist Press. I stopped subscribing to their material a couple of years ago – just didn’t find it worth my time to look through.
The dissolution of a marriage is never funny, even if it is the result of egragarious sin.
If a little humor offends you, Dave, you probably just better not read the things I write.
Dave, other than Adrian, Smith, Draper, Stanley, Vines, Chapman, Young et al…I don’t recall voting for any of the CR conservative prezes.
I don’t think that BP has the clout these days to force an issue or point of view.
William, I agree with that. To be honest, BP is seen as what it is – not a news reporting source, but a PR wing for the Executive Committee. I agree about their lack of clout.
Why does Morris Chapman think his ideas about The SBC are “A Better Way” against a multitude of people who were on the GCR committee, praying, seeking God’s will? If his is such “A better way” why didn’t he implement these ideas the many years that he was executive director of the SBC?
I guess we all tend to think that our way is the better way, don’t we? Dr. Chapman, in his last few years, seems to have become a protector of the status quo. He is a very good man with whom I disagree. I hope the GCR viewpoint prevails in Orlando.
So, you guys are just now figuring out that Baptist Press has a bias problem? I don’t think I would have admitted to being that slow. LOL
You aren’t the first person to call me slow.
Frankly, Joel, I was more aware of its anti-conservative bias during the CR, since it hit me harder. I didn’t really pay that much attention to it in the intervening years until the GCR. I read an article here and there.
I have been frustrated all along that it did not give more “news”. When something would happen and I wanted to know what was going on, I had to search elsewhere to find it out.
But when the GCR hit, I got a little more upset, since once again I was running contrary to the bias.
I guess you only notice it when it is aimed at you.
I met Dr. Chapman last Saturday at a wedding. He’s a very friendly, down to Earth, gracious, Christian man. BTW, he’s also a man that helped lead the SBC thru a very critical time in our history…the CR. He took a lot of heat during that time. So, we need to show him the honor that’s due him for leading us thru such a volatile time.
BTW, just because he’s against the GC Report doesnt make him a villain. Also, just because he thinks that aggressive, 5 point Calvinism is not a good thing doesnt make him a mean, grumpy, old man. He should be allowed to have his opinions, just like yall have your opinions, and you share them on this blog. In fact, I’ve also read pro-GC articles in the Bapt. Press. So, I guess they do show the “other side” as well.
David
In fact, you can most of what BP has written about the GC task force and it’s report here:
http://bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=32555
Vol, please read clearly what I said here. I did not criticize Dr. Chapman for having his opinions. Though I disagree with him, and think some of his criticisms have been unfair, I think Dr. Chapman is doing the right thing to air his opinions. That whole “right to dissent” thing.
My issue is with the slanted coverage of Baptist Press, and the fact that it is not really “press” but an Executive Committee public relations arm.
I think we need an independent Baptist Press.
And Vol, thanks for the link. I should have put that into my original article.
The problem with this article is that it represents the real truth of the consevative movement. If you are not with us 100% drink all of the kool-aid you are against us. We will label you a moderate or maybe worse. I don’t agree 100% with the GCR report. I will not vote for it as a whole. Why all of the hating?
If I disagree with the GCR am I someone to be hated? Ridiculous
Jonathan, I find myself wondering if you even read the article, since your angry comment had little to do with anything I wrote.
The point is that we need a more open Press that represents different viewpoints, not just acting as a PR arm of the Executive Committee.
Could you demonstrate how your comment had anything to do with my article or any of the comments?
You bring up some great points, especially the distinction between PR and news. Where the jury is still out is whether or not Baptists, as individuals and as a larger family, want to fund pure journalism … which includes stories that could put Baptists in an unfavorable light. Many Baptist papers have been “absorbed” into convention communications departments because leaders have scratched their heads and asked, “Why would we pay a newspaper staff to write stories we don’t like?” Subscriptions and advertising usually are not enough to support a newspaper, much less an organization such as Baptist Press. We respect a free press, but unfortunately it is “free” in only one sense of the word. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Dannah, that is of course the fly in the ointment – money. Agencies are willing to fund a PR arm, but would not really want a press agency that is willing to report unflattering stats or information.
I think Southern Baptists would appreciate a more journalistic press corps, but leaders probably would not.
I agree with your observaton that BP is now more of a PR arm of the SBC. When the CR was at it’s height, all about inerrancy of the original manuscripts of the Bible,(How very far away the original issue seems now) BP tried very hard to be fair to both sides. When BP reported anything negative about the fundmentalist/conservatives, they howled like banshees at the injustice of the “attack”. All the elections were covered completely and fairly. All sides of the inerrancy debate were examined. All the seminaries were examined and only two were found to need adjustment. Of course, that was proved false when the F/Cs fired President Russel H Dilday from SWBTS without notice or cause, simply because they had the raw power to do it. When BP reported anything about the moderate/conservatives, the F/Cs complained how BP was biased in favor of the M/Cs. Now, when BP publishes articles against the GCR, the very same critics the old, biased BP learn they can’t stand the heat even from their new BP pep squad. Had not scores of godly, decent, Bible-believing, Christ-honoring men and women had their lives and careers destroyed by the results of the CR, the current situation would be richly ironic.
I always heard from its proponents that the success of the CR would bring a new day and a golden tomorrow to the purified, unified and cleansed SBC. Once we fired or retired all those ol’liberals, the blessings of heaven would rain down and giving and baptisms would soar to unprecidented levels. We’re still waiting.
Its pretty easy to sit back and criticize now, Randy. First, I disagree that BP was balanced during the CR years. It was relentless in its opposition to the CR and to the leaders of the CR.
Second, while we are not exactly exploding in growth, I think the SBC is better now that where it would be if the liberal elements had been allowed to keep growing. Try to find a liberal denomination that isn’t shrinking dramatically.
It is easy to gloat now over the struggles of the SBC, but I can tell you this, I would not be part of a liberal denomination. I don’t know why some of the people who hate the SBC stay in it, but I know this – I wouldn’t have stayed if the liberals had won the day.
I have often wondered why the CBF doesn’t leave the SBC and form their own denomination. I think we would both be better off if they did.
Whatever struggles we have had in the SBC have been multiplied in the CBF. They have had identity struggles, financial struggles and have not grown. I think they thought more churches would join them after the CR. But liberalism is the death of denominations and churches – a fact which has been demonstrated over and over again.
David, Thank you for your comments. I appreciate the opportunity to respond.
First, it’s my opinion that BP was relentless only in its opposition to the methods and tactics of the CR leaders and the BP reporting of those means led the fundamentalist/conservatives to change BP from an award-winning, respected source of news about the SBC it was into the PR firm it is today.
Second, regarding “I think the SBC is better now than where it would be if the liberal elements had been allowed to keep growing.” isn’t the CR argument always been that liberal elements never grow?
Lastly, as a life-long Southern Baptist I do not hate the SBC and I don’t believe you were referring to me. As Herschel Hobbs said, “I’m on the bus. I may not be driving the bus, but I’m staying on the bus.” I don’t think CBF believers hate the SBC either. Perhaps we are just sad that the current climate of the SBC would prefer us to know our place on the bus and remain silent if we cannot join in cheering on the WINNERS!
I don’t know you, Randy, so I can’t say this of you. But my experience on the blogs shows me that there is a strong feeling within the CBF groups a sort of rejoicing over the struggles of the SBC.
I guess we are dealing in the realm of opinion and speculation where proof is hard to come by. I never felt that BP was fair to the conservative movement during CR days. There was a constant drumbeat of “there are no theological problems” and “this is all about power” and “conservatives are mean” and stuff like that.
You are a polite and well-spoken person and I appreciate your spirit. I don’t know if we can convince each other of our viewpoints, but I appreciate interacting with you.
Thank God that the SBC is dealing with how Calvinistic we’re going to be, rather than dealing with universalism….like in the CR days. Thank God that today a lot of us are calling for better ecclesiology, rather than dealing with people, who deny the inerrancy of Scripture…as it was in the days of the CR. Thank God that we’re discussing a Great Commission Resurgence, and what’s the best way to accomplish this; rather than dealing with people, who just wanted us to do social work-with really no preaching of the Gospel…as it was in the days of the CR.
The SBC is far, far, far better off today; than it was in Pre-CR days. Way better. No comparison.
I’ll take todays SBC over the Pre-CR SBC any day of the week.
David
Brother Dave,
we do not really have a Baptist Press – we have a public relations arm for Morris Chapman and the Executive Committee.
Thanks for parroting the classic moderate line. That one is so old, I blew the same dust off of it that I blew off of my 45 rpm record.
Blessings,
Tim
Tim -
Tsk, tsk, tsk… You either issued a classic circumstantial ad hominem fallacy or a classic guilt by association fallacy.
In the case of ad hominem you seem to imply that Dave is too dumb to have a valid argument and must parrot others; but you could also be joking. Emotion is so difficult in this arena.
In the case of guilt by association you seem to imply that Dave’s argument is invalid because his statment is associated with “moderates.” If I recall correctly, you are not a 5-point Calvinist, which would mean you are a Moderate Calvinist. The opposite is also true that holding to some of Arminian theology (I’m guessing universal attonment and conditional election) you are a Moderate Arminean. Would that mean you are doubly-moderate or super moderate or thoroghly moderate? But I digress…
Pehaps the comments could be kept to the premise at hand that BP (not Britsh Petroleum) is more of a public relations organization than a journalistic organization. I haven’t read it in years; only as a kid when there was nothing else in the bathroom during an extendid visit.
On the face of the argument, I agree with the premise regardless of the list of articles: no non-independant publishing organization can truly be journalistic with out threatening it’s own existence. For BP to be truley journalistic, whether simply reporting the going’s-on of committees (at least the official public ones) or investigating claims such as the blog post about SWBTS, it must be independent enough to publish true facts, statements, and quotes with out the fear of official retribution (being fired). Otherwise it is merely a propaganda arm regardless of the intentions of the employees; even if it is allowed to publish some “opinion” pieces.