Imagine someone who expected the media to stand for justice, accuracy, ethical work and much more, serving as an unfettered channel for understanding.
Most readers would fit that description.
But that describes Pope John Paul II as well. A champion of dialogue and tolerance, he had experienced firsthand the darkness of injustice, ignorance, rank propaganda and intolerance, from life under Nazi tyranny to the bullet of a would-be assassin.
Such experience helped to shape his view of the media’s role and responsibilities.
He left us a sketch of that view less than three months ago in an apostolic letter, a teaching document that some may consider a bit of sacred feedback, issued from the Vatican on Jan. 24 — the feast day of St. Francis de Sales, patron saint of journalists because of his work as a writer.
John Paul gave the media much to think about during the process of repairing damaged credibility and recommitment to serving the people with sound practice.
His letter carries a gracious air of urgency based on the realization that we live in “an age of global communication in which countless moments of human existence are either spent with, or at least confronted by, the different processes of the mass media.”
Even considered quickly in bits and pieces, as this column requires, John Paul’s thoughts resonate eloquently and universally with concerns that readers frequently express.
“The mass media,” he wrote, “can and must promote justice and solidarity by reporting events accurately and truthfully, analyzing situations and problems completely, and providing a forum for different opinions.”
John Paul does not glorify failures like plagiarism or any sort of distortion by mentioning them, but it’s clear that he views journalism as a sacred trust not to be violated.
“Jesus teaches that communication is a moral act,” he wrote, citing Matthew 12:35-37: “A good person brings forth good out of a store of goodness, but an evil person brings forth evil out of a store of evil. I tell you, on the Day of Judgment people will render an account for every careless word they speak. By your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.”
It’s interesting to note as well that John Paul nails the various forces not only within the media but also in the public and private sectors that are at odds with ethical practice and transparency.
Everyone needs help, he said, “when one considers how greatly the obstacles intrinsic to communication can be increased by ideologies, by the desire for profit or for power, and by rivalries and conflicts between individuals and groups, and also because of human weakness and social troubles.”
In one broad stroke, John Paul appears to have covered a multitude of agents of confusion ranging from partisan ego and spin to government secrecy, corporate scheming, self-obsessed personal ambition and willingness to sacrifice principle in the name of competition.
He counsels: “An authentically ethical approach to using the powerful communication media must be situated within the context of a mature exercise of freedom and responsibility, founded upon the supreme criteria of truth and justice.”
John Paul saw consumers of news and information as partners with the media in shaping a communications process that could withstand lapses in human effort and comprehension.
His words touch on the need for collegiality as an antidote to pride of authorship, ideas and authority that can create a class system within newsrooms that leads to estrangement not only between staff and management but also between staff and the public.
“The positive development of the media at the service of the common good is a responsibility of each and every one,” he said.
I hear John Paul saying that readers are obligated to speak up when they have questions, concerns or other thoughts for the media, and journalists are obligated to listen to them. As in any relationship, two-way communication works best, especially when concern for the common good trumps a need for credit.
Further, “if the communications media are a good destined for all humanity,” he said, the media must always search for new ways “to make possible a true participation in their management by all. The culture of co-responsibility must be nurtured.”
Ultimately, John Paul, who modeled an unprecedented commitment to healing all manner of divisions in the human condition, encourages a focus on what is perhaps the media’s greatest role.
He emphasized that “there cannot be forgotten the great possibilities of mass media in promoting dialogue, becoming vehicles for reciprocal knowledge, of solidarity and of peace. They become a powerful resource for good if used to foster understanding between peoples; a destructive ‘weapon’ if used to foster injustice and conflicts.”
And, he adds, don’t be afraid of new technologies, opposition or “even your own weakness and inadequacy.” Communication is a natural part of life. Use it well.
