It's been way too long.

So I have the impulse to blog again. Not that I haven't in the past oh, three weeks, but I've been quite busy.

Things are actually winding down for me. Just two simple finals and one last issue of The Chimes. 

But I haven't been devoid of thoughts in the past three weeks, I assure you.

The thing weighing most prevalently on my mind now is loneliness.

Not that I'm lonely right now -- I actually just had a fabulous time driving through the freezing night air, windows rolled down, with my roommates to Taco Bell because the defroster wouldn't work. I seriously strengthened my stomach muscles fivefold this evening.

But I keep realizing how much I need other people. 

Being entirely by myself never really bothered me before I came to Biola. I did everything on my own. Studied on my own. Ate on my own. Drove everywhere on my own. Sure, I had my friends, but I would just hang out with them on weekends -- when I wasn't studying, that is. =p

But ever since I came to Biola, solitude hasn't really been much of an option. 

And now, when it is -- in those few times when I'm completely on my own doing homework or Chimes work -- I can't help but feel the absence of people.

And I can't stand it.

I know that God means for us to live in community. I know that it is good.

But this is one lesson from Biola I'm still not sure I'm glad I've learned.

Because well, learning it means that I have to acknowledge that I need other people.

And that scares me.

I don't like the idea of needing to rely on anyone other than myself. 

People take up time. People let you down.

People slow you down. 

And yet, so much of the richness in my life right now is because of, well, people.

And so there's this tension between gratitude and frustration as my independence wobbles just a bit.

I know I need God. That lesson I've had to learn the hard way.

But needing people? 

That's harder.

Guess God isn't finished with me yet -- and that's definitely a good thing. :)

Christianity and the secular newsroom: Not conflicting, but complementary

Most people are shocked — or at the very least, perplexed — when I say I want to work at a secular publication after graduation.

A typical response is something along the lines of, “Why not work at a nice magazine like Christianity Today, or even Brio Magazine? Those other publications are so secular.”

For me, the latter portion of that response is my answer.

It's precisely because the press is so secular that there is such a desperate need for diligent, thoughtful, trustworthy Christian journalists.

While I in no way wish to trivialize the importance of those religious publications, I feel particularly called to work in a distinctly secular environment. It's something God has placed on my heart, and it's where my passion lies.

First off, I sharply disagree with those who think their careers and their faith should be divorced, something one woman reporter in the text prizes (47). A Christian, by definition, is someone who integrates his or her dependence upon and love for God into every facet of life.

It should come naturally.

Also, a Christian shouldn't be dismayed or concerned when coworkers pinpoint their faith, as that same reporter in the text was (47).

Christ, I think, makes it clear that we should not camouflage or cover up our faith; it isn't something to be ashamed of, but treasured. On the other hand, a Christian journalist shouldn't go about flaunting his or her faith. Neither should be necessary.

Rather, those common threads between journalism and Christianity of truth and justice, of accuracy and ethics, should go hand in hand.

As my concept of the role of a Christian journalist develops, I find myself aligning more and more with philosophies like those of Coleman McCarthy, a Washington Post columnist. As journalists, we have the opportunity to share the stories of the impoverished, the hurting and the marginalized to the masses. I don't want to “just be an entertainer,” as McCarthy said, when I can actually make a difference in this world with my words (54).

Essentially, it is the task first of a Christian journalist to gain the complete respect of coworkers. Only once one gains credibility as a good journalist will that person be able to slowly alter the perception of religion in the media from the inside out.

At my internship in a secular newsroom this summer, my coworkers knew I was a Christian student at Biola University. Twice, when Scripture-related questions arose in the newsroom — one of which was a source's reference to Lazarus — they directed their questions to me. Hopefully, they saw that my faith didn't conflict with my professional work, but if anything, complemented it.

Coworkers were much more candid with me when I was candid with them on questions of my own faith and completed my tasks with diligence.

I want more than almost anything to be a Christian of intelligence and integrity in my future profession, that I might chip away at the negative perception of Christians in the media.

Christian Century and Christianity Today

The Christian Century generally ascribes a little more of a liberal slant to its writings than Christianity Today.

An article in the Oct. 6 issue, for example, commended President Obama for acknowledging the importance of “rugged individualism” and making a moral case for health-care reform.

Century also includes a half-page ad for emergence workshopping sessions in its Oct. 6 edition. Traditional, conservative Christians often perceive emergence as a threat to the faith. 

The entire back page of the Century's Oct. 6 issue is devoted to an ad from IVP Books on social injustice, something many consider a liberal-leaning philosophy.

The words “evangelism” and “evangelical” appear far more frequently in Today than in Century. 

Today does use one of President Obama's quotes, however, in its October “Quotation Marks” section. The publication can't be too conservative.

Today  published a rather shocking article in its October issue entitled, “More evangelical therapists move from changing orientation to embracing faith identity for gays.” The article quoted those in favor of the method more than those opposed.

Neither magazine is extremely liberal or conservative, and the majority of Christians would probably digest their content without too many objections one way or the other. 

A sobering experience: My interview with a homicide reporter from the L.A. Times

Interview with Ruben Vives, L.A. Times reporter who covered multiple homicide cases. 

Me: How does your job fit into the ever-changing trends of journalism in the 21st century? 

Vives: Blogging is the big thing. I mean, part of my life as a reporter is dedicated to this blog that we have at the Times, the L.A. NOW blog. ... Another thing that's been introduced to journalism is the idea of Facebook, Myspace ... this floodgate of information that is out there for you ...

Me: Do you feel called or prompted to the field of journalism?  

Vives: At work, I've had this discussion with a few reporters where we stand around and it's surreal to be where we are, thinking, 'I don't know what I'd do without this job.' Sometimes, it's stress and it's long hours. The pay isn't that great. ... Sometimes, when you write stories that actually make a difference in someone's life, I think that is what kind of makes you think, 'Wow, I love this job. This is really what I want to do.'

Me: How does what you do make a difference in the world?

Vives: I've always had an issue with homeless people. ... bodies that were being found that were never identified. There were no families to claim the bodies. ... They [thousands of bodies] were [cremated and] put in this little slot in the ground at the county cemetery with a little plaque that had the year that they all had died. ... And the only family they have are investigators. ... Last year, we had a fire up in the San Fernando Valley area. ... A homeless man died here. No one really did followup. ... I've been following the investigation. ... Hopefully, it will get people to realize, 'You know, I should really get to at least know the name of that homeless guy I always see in the corner all the time.' ... I've been able to manage to find a name and now we're trying to track the family. ... I really do wish that he is not part of that group that gets buried at the county cemetery unknown.

Me: How did you cope when you were dealing with tragedy after tragedy, day in and day out?

Vives: I have an understanding with these families in when I was around 11, I think, 1992, my uncle was killed by gang members. ... My family was destroyed by that. I saw the effects of what a homicide, a murder, does to a family because I lived through it. ... I always had that in mind. ... But the coping part, it's not very easy.

Me: Do you ever see God show up in your profession, or do you work with people who do?

Vives: I've never really actually heard about that from reporters. Reporters are people. We all have our own beliefs. We all have our own religions. But I think when it comes to journalism, we've come to understand that you're putting all that aside and you're there to do a job.

Internet reporter under scrutiny in state with no shield law -- Hawaii

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=18581

(Zimmerman story) 

A 2007 civil court case involving an Internet reporter, documented by the Associated Press on May 21, 2007, raised two rather difficult questions: 1. Should journalists have the right to keep information they obtain from courts, and 2. Does an Internet reporter have the right to the same protections as a traditional reporter? 

Attorney William McCorriston, in a lawsuit presented by landowner James Pflueger over the failure of the Kaloko Dam in Hawaii that resulted in a 20-foot wave and seven deaths, claimed Malia Zimmerman from Hawaiiireporter.com didn't.

“It seems to me that if a blogger is a journalist, everyone can produce a blog and never be subject to a subpoena,” the AP quoted McCorriston as saying.

Zimmerman, an editor and reporter for the Web site, said she does legitimate journalistic work and reports at higher standards than some run-of-the-mill blogger. 

“It's not the medium you publish in, it's what you do with that information,” Zimmerman said, according to the AP. 

The judge, Gary Chang, ordered Zimmerman to submit to questioning by oath under McCorriston, but allowed her to refuse to answer. The court would later decide whether or not it would force Zimmerman to comply. 

If I were Zimmerman, I believe I would comply with the court's wishes. Seven people died as a result of the failure of this bridge. Fault must be placed. Here, many “newspaper people today are ethically confused,” as Philip Meyer wrote in his essay, “The reporter's right to testify,” in Elliot D. Cohen's book, Philosophical Issues in Journalism. 

First, however, I'd want to make sure the desired information couldn't be accessed by any other reasonable means. Could the prosecution carry out the same investigation I did?

Also, I would have to assess the potential ramifications for my sources. Would I be seriously betraying their trust and compromising their well-being? 

One main argument against my compliance would be the “chilling effect,” as reporter Roy Greenslade noted as he covered an ongoing court case in the Oct. 6 edition of the London Evening Standard.

“If reporters reveal the provenance of sensitive information given to them on the grounds of confidentiality, sources will dry up,” he wrote. 

My decision would have to consider potential future consequences. 

Finally, I would assess what would be accomplished by the surrendering of my notes. Is my information essential to the solving of the case? Would the families involved receive justice? If not, I would probably refuse.

That aside, if my compliance would help little and the issue became simply a matter of privileging traditional reporters over Internet reporters, I would fiercely refuse. As long as I was adhering to the same standards of fact checking and rigor as a traditional journalist, I should be treated equally. 

Ultimately, I would probably comply. As Meyer wrote, 

“If the newspaper were truly strong, perhaps it could afford to be more routinely helpful.”

Sometimes, acting as a responsible, willing member of society should trump journalistic privileges. 

Introspection: Looking at papers' opinions of their nations gauges level of freedom

One of the best ways to analyze the freedom of a newspaper is to analyze its perception of the nation it supposedly serves. One hopes to see the entire spectrum in opinions pages. However, this isn't always the case, as three opinions articles from a leading Chinese paper depict when contrasted with opinions articles from the Washington Post.

China Daily writer Li Ling talked about nothing but the accomplishments of China in an Oct. 2, 2009 article entitled, “Great legacy of the first three decades,” written in celebration of the nation's 60th birthday. Sure, climbing literacy rates and increased school enrollment are great. But almost every sentence begins with, “The government,” crediting the nation's success to the pothat be. Ling places the government on a lofty pedestal. 

That same day, Steven Pearlstein offered a powerful critique of American society in analyzing Michael Moore's newest film, “Capitalism: A Love Story,” for the Post.

Pearlstein agrees that the economic system that has upheld the U.S. for over 230 years is crumbling. He questions not only government, but the very economic fabric of American society.

On Sept. 30, the Daily's Eric Nillson attempted to explain why the Chinese love their nation so much in his article entitled, “Never a better time to be Chinese.” Nillson even says the world should “venerate” the nation's birthday along with the Chinese.

The Post, on the other hand, keeps a critical eye on those in power. In an Oct. 4 article, columnist David Broder analyzes the president's performance so far and urges readers to wait see how Obama will handle the campaign for healthcare reform. 

“What are his chances of pulling it [his plan] off?” he wrote.

Broder places Obama under a microscope, not on a pedestal. Furthermore, he promotes dialogue, something Judith Andre advises in her essay, “'Censorship: Some Distinctions,” in Richard Cohen's book, Philosophical Issues in Journalism. 

“One person's discord is another's vitality,” she writes. 

Finally, the Daily's Orville Schell gives yet another idyllic picture of China today on Sept. 29. China's new government leadership has brought the nation to new heights, he says.

That may truly be Schell's opinion and it may even be true, but the bias of a paper is oftentimes revealed as much through what is absent as through what is present, Cohen notes. No articles clearly counter Schell in the archives.

Fear of government punishment is a ferocious driving force for media, as Andre says. With that rosy-red portrayal, Schell is safe.

On Sept. 29 in the Post, Richard Cohen (no typo) offers his own opinion on Barack Obama that's a little less favorable than the Chinese outlook on its own government. The president needs to stop campaigning and start working, he says. In America, the president will always be the most popular news beat, as Fred Smoller notes in his article in Cohen's book, “Network News Coverage of the Presidency: Implications for Democracy.”

The Daily's opinions pieces promote the government, while the Post keeps it in check.