American Catholics Like Pope; American Journalists Not So Much
After all of the howling and screaming from the mainstream media, out comes an interesting poll--American Catholics overwhelmingly approve of the choice of Ratzinger as Pope. More than 80% support the choice of Pope, and 73% characterize their support of Pope Benedict as "enthusiastic." Strangely, the Washington Post article revealing the results of their joint poll with ABC News offers this opening sentence of interpretation/analysis after relating the raw data:
The poll suggested the magnitude of the challenge facing the newly installed pontiff in the United States as he attempts to lead a congregation deeply split between those who want the church to maintain its traditional policies and beliefs, and those who say the church needs to change in order to reflect the way Catholics live today.
What!? The surprise here is that the Pope we have been told again and again and again is extreme, polarizing, and poorly recieved is actually quite well received. Rather than acknowledge the largely mistaken prevailing assumption of the American media, the Post immediately reverts to the same original (now debunked) Pope talking points--he is out of step with the modern world and will have a hard time winning over American Catholics.
It is truly incredible that the interpretive analysis of this poll immediately homes in on the dissension within the Catholic church. It's now a news story when 27% of people are not "enthusiastic" about a world leader with highly visible stances on abortion, euthanasia, birth control, gay marriage, and the death penalty? What person in modern times has held a position of power with highly visible stances on all of those issues and enjoyed the enthusiastic support of 3 out of 4 citizens in a country where his/her particular views are least popular? It's actually astounding the level of support the man has in this country after every story on his election included rude nicknames coined by his enemies (e.g. "darth vader"), negative buzzwords (e.g. "ultraconservative"), and manipulative associations with the Nazi party (which his father resisted, and whose army he deserted after being drafted).
It's an amazing progression:
1) Ratzinger delivers a critical conclave sermon that is mostly an internal warning/rebuke and prays that he will not be elected Pope, but is nevertheless elected faster than almost anyone in the last century.
2) He is immediately dragged through the mud by the 24 hour news cycle with alarmist reaction pieces from almost every major media outlet in the United States.
3) He somehow still gains the "enthusiastic" support of 3/4 of American Catholics.
4) The Washington Post surveys this data and comments on the "deeply split" American faithful.
Did they just write a story about infighting in the Catholic church before the poll and not bother to write a new one when they got the results back?
The poll suggested the magnitude of the challenge facing the newly installed pontiff in the United States as he attempts to lead a congregation deeply split between those who want the church to maintain its traditional policies and beliefs, and those who say the church needs to change in order to reflect the way Catholics live today.
What!? The surprise here is that the Pope we have been told again and again and again is extreme, polarizing, and poorly recieved is actually quite well received. Rather than acknowledge the largely mistaken prevailing assumption of the American media, the Post immediately reverts to the same original (now debunked) Pope talking points--he is out of step with the modern world and will have a hard time winning over American Catholics.
It is truly incredible that the interpretive analysis of this poll immediately homes in on the dissension within the Catholic church. It's now a news story when 27% of people are not "enthusiastic" about a world leader with highly visible stances on abortion, euthanasia, birth control, gay marriage, and the death penalty? What person in modern times has held a position of power with highly visible stances on all of those issues and enjoyed the enthusiastic support of 3 out of 4 citizens in a country where his/her particular views are least popular? It's actually astounding the level of support the man has in this country after every story on his election included rude nicknames coined by his enemies (e.g. "darth vader"), negative buzzwords (e.g. "ultraconservative"), and manipulative associations with the Nazi party (which his father resisted, and whose army he deserted after being drafted).
It's an amazing progression:
1) Ratzinger delivers a critical conclave sermon that is mostly an internal warning/rebuke and prays that he will not be elected Pope, but is nevertheless elected faster than almost anyone in the last century.
2) He is immediately dragged through the mud by the 24 hour news cycle with alarmist reaction pieces from almost every major media outlet in the United States.
3) He somehow still gains the "enthusiastic" support of 3/4 of American Catholics.
4) The Washington Post surveys this data and comments on the "deeply split" American faithful.
Did they just write a story about infighting in the Catholic church before the poll and not bother to write a new one when they got the results back?
posted by Luke @ 4:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home