Posted by Manya Brachear at 9:30 a.m. CST
For more than three decades, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. resented the media for not paying attention to his cause. Now that the press is paying attention, the iconoclastic pastor is learning that it's a lot harder to control his message in the press than in the pulpit.
Case in point: A few weeks ago, The Seeker wrote about Sen. Barack Obama's decision to ask Wright not to deliver the benediction in February when Obama announced he would seek the Democratic presidential nomination.
Wright apparently mentioned the disinvitation to a New York Times reporter during a two-hour interview for an in-depth piece about Obama's spiritual journey. The pastor was apparently unhappy with the news story that appeared the next day, which highlighted seven minutes of their conversation -- and now Wright is declining to offer any more interviews about Obama.
Sources are often surprised when reporters for daily newspapers sit down to gather information for a broad story and then must meet their journalistic obligation if news is made during that interview. It doesn't mean the in-depth story will never appear. (In fact, if it's truly in-depth it should require more than one interview with more than one source.) The next-day story often means the reporter ended up with more work than she expected that day, in addition to the broader story still in the works.
The church is apparently taking steps to guard against the media onslaught. Wright is currently declining all interview requests regarding Obama. And since the announcement, the church adopted "policies and procedures for use with outside media sources." Any breach of the rules will lead to the reporter's immediate ouster from the church and the confiscation of all interview notes and photos. The Obama campaign said it did not advise Wright to adopt the unusual media policy, which many media organizations including the Tribune would never sign.
But according to Newsweek, the Times writer who delivered the news did. Which should go to show that getting a reporter to sign an agreement does not guarantee the church will be happy with the story. A relationship with reporters should be based on honesty, trust and professionalism.
The following letter addressed to the reporter appeared in Trinity United Church of Christ's bulletin this past Sunday:
March 11, 2007
Jodi Kantor
The New York Times
9 West 43rd Street
New York,
New York 10036-3959
Dear Jodi:
Thank you for engaging in one of the biggest misrepresentations of the truth I have ever seen in sixty-five years.You sat and shared with me for two hours. You told me you were doing a “Spiritual Biography” of Senator Barack Obama. For two hours, I shared with you how I thought he was the most principled individual in public service that I have ever met.
For two hours, I talked with you about how idealistic he was. For two hours I shared with you what a genuine human being he was. I told you how incredible he was as a man who was an African American in public service, and as a man who refused to announce his candidacy for President until Carol Moseley Braun indicated one way or the other whether or not she was going to run.
I told you what a dreamer he was. I told you how idealistic he was. We talked about how refreshing it would be for someone who knew about Islam to be in the Oval Office. Your own question to me was, Didn’t I think it would be incredible to have somebody in the Oval Office who not only knew about Muslims, but had living and breathing Muslims in his own family? I told you how important it would be to have a man who not only knew the difference between Shiites and Sunnis prior to 9/11/01 in the Oval Office, but also how important it would be to have a man who knew what Sufism was; a man who understood that there were different branches of Judaism; a man who knew the difference between Hasidic Jews, Orthodox Jews, Conservative Jews and Reformed Jews; and a man who was a devout Christian, but who did not prejudge others because they believed something other than what he believed.
I talked about how rare it was to meet a man whose Christianity was not just “in word only.” I talked about Barack being a person who lived his faith and did not argue his faith. I talked about Barack as a person who did not draw doctrinal lines in the sand nor consign other people to hell if they did not believe what he believed.
Out of a two-hour conversation with you about Barack’s spiritual journey and my protesting to you that I had not shaped him nor formed him, that I had not mentored him or made him the man he was, even though I would love to take that credit, you did not print any of that. When I told you, using one of your own Jewish stories from the Hebrew Bible as to how God asked Moses, “What is that in your hand?,” that Barack was like that when I met him. Barack had it “in his hand.” Barack had in his grasp a uniqueness in terms of his spiritual development that one is hard put to find in the 21st century, and you did not print that.
As I was just starting to say a moment ago, Jodi, out of two hours of conversation I spent approximately five to seven minutes on Barack’s taking advice from one of his trusted campaign people and deeming it unwise to make me the media spotlight on the day of his announcing his candidacy for the Presidency and what do you print? You and your editor proceeded to present to the general public a snippet, a printed “sound byte” and a titillating and tantalizing article about his disinviting me to the Invocation on the day of his announcing his candidacy.
I have never been exposed to that kind of duplicitous behavior before, and I want to write you publicly to let you know that I do not approve of it and will not be party to any further smearing of the name, the reputation, the integrity or the character of perhaps this nation’s first (and maybe even only) honest candidate offering himself for public service as the person to occupy the Oval Office.
Your editor is a sensationalist. For you to even mention that makes me doubt your credibility, and I am looking forward to see how you are going to butcher what else I had to say concerning Senator Obama’s “Spiritual Biography.” Our Conference Minister, the Reverend Jane Fisler Hoffman, a white woman who belongs to a Black church that Hannity of “Hannity and Colmes” is trying to trash, set the record straight for you in terms of who I am and in terms of who we are as the church to which Barack has belonged for over twenty years.
The president of our denomination, the Reverend John Thomas, has offered to try to help you clarify in your confused head what Trinity Church is even though you spent the entire weekend with us setting me up to interview me for what turned out to be a smear of the Senator; and yet The New York Times continues to roll on making the truth what it wants to be the truth. I do not remember reading in your article that Barack had apologized for listening to that bad information and bad advice. Did I miss it? Or did your editor cut it out? Either way, you do not have to worry about hearing anything else from me for you to edit or “spin” because you are more interested in journalism than in truth.
Forgive me for having a momentary lapse. I forgot that The New York Times was leading the bandwagon in trumpeting why it is we should have gone into an illegal war. The New York Times became George Bush and the Republican Party’s national “blog.” The New York Times played a role in the outing of Valerie Plame. I do not know why I thought The New York Times had actually repented and was going to exhibit a different kind of behavior.
Maybe it was my faith in the Jewish Holy Day of Roshashana. Maybe it was my being caught up in the euphoria of the Season of Lent; but whatever it is or was, I was sadly mistaken. There is no repentance on the part of The New York Times. There is no integrity when it comes to The Times. You should do well with that paper, Jodi. You looked me straight in my face and told me a lie!
Sincerely and respectfully yours,
Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. ,
Senior Pastor
Trinity United Church of Christ







Comments
Since the "Swamp" has broached the topic of Obama's church, let's take the look at it that the Chicago media refuses to.
First off, from an March 20th AP story about his pastor's ties to Louis Farrakhan, Mohamar Ghadafi and "Palestinian causes":
"But in an interview with PBS's "Religion & Ethics Newsweekly" recorded just before Obama's February announcement, Wright said he warned the senator that their association could pose political problems, partly because of his history of supporting Palestinian causes.
Wright also told The New York Times in an interview published March 6: "When his (Obama's) enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli" with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan to visit Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, "a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell.""
"The roughly 8,000-member church has often championed liberal causes, from gay rights to opposition to the Iraq war. It also emphasizes its African roots and asks parishioners to accept the "Black Value System," which includes tenets such as "commitment to the black family," "dedication to the pursuit of education" and one critics have seized upon _ "disavowal of the pursuit of 'middleclassness.'"
Another story is how the church hosted a Kerry/Obama campaign rally in 2004 (7-27). The rally was even broadcast on C-SPAN. Can anyone remember what Liberals usually say about churches not becoming political actors?
The church's website is at
http://www.tucc.org/home.htm
Take a look at it, and especially take a look at "About us" and the so-called "Black value system", which includes "6. Disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness" and more frighteningly "11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System".
Can anyone imagine the media firestorm that would result if a Republican presidential candidate's church, one he frequently refers to in speeches, a) hosted GOP campaign rallies, b) played footsie with racists like Farrakhan, c) promoted a racial (Black or White) "Value System", and d) called on its members to pledge allegiance to particular candidates?
Posted by: bruce | March 23, 2007 12:20 PM
None of us need a reporter's explanation to see that what the reporter did was wrong.
Posted by: Tom | March 23, 2007 12:41 PM
Wrong for doing what, his job? How is informing the public about the most newsworthy information to come out of the event wrong?
The reverend told a reporter he was upset about the disinvitation, he should've known that'd make news if he was telling it to a reporter.
Re-read Manya's intro:
"Sources are often surprised when reporters for daily newspapers sit down to gather information for a broad story and then must meet their journalistic obligation if news is made during that interview. It doesn't mean the in-depth story will never appear."
Posted by: Jeff Y. | March 23, 2007 1:15 PM
bruce,
Clearly you haven't seen Jesus Camp. In that movie, children weep at the sight of a life sized cardboard cut-out of President Bush and pledge allegiance to him. This is part of the Evangelical movement. A bigger movement than the Trinity United Church of Christ.
Posted by: jethro | March 23, 2007 2:28 PM
Bruce,
Your inane crying about Obama is getting old and you forgot to attack the liberal media this time.
You're losing touch with reality Mr.Robot.
Illinois is a BLUE STATE, Bruce!
Posted by: John E. | March 23, 2007 2:51 PM
Hey count me in with Pinocchio, attends a race based church, his pastor has ties to Farrakhan and Ghadafi, thinks the Palestinian's are just great, can't seem to tell the truth. has a step brother who is a practicing Muslim, it's all good, I think we hit a home run with guy. I'm sure Pinocchio is happy he joined that church now.
Posted by: Don B | March 24, 2007 12:53 AM
Did the reporter whisper to the reverend "This is just between you and me..."
Posted by: Terry | March 24, 2007 12:19 PM
What do I know about Trinity UCC in Chicago? That lives are being changed for the better there. That people are growing in their spiritual life in Jesus Christ there. That people are being invited in to that congregation and being sent out to help the world to know the living presence of God.
I'm white...which really doesn't matter to God and the body of Christ.
I think the dilemma is that the news media is focused on communicating news. We in the body of Christ are focused on communicating the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The media never in human history was expected to do that...nor have they rarely been able to on purpose. All these conversations do is focus on selling news. We in the body of Christ need to be aware of the difference. (This same dilemma is present also with the political arena.)
Posted by: David Loar | March 24, 2007 1:02 PM
There's no doubt that reporters, journalists, and media are sick in the head. They believe can justify their own lying by exposing bigger "lies" (which are actually just biased opinions). What a farce.
It comes down to ETHICS. And they are becoming quite rare here in the 21st century.
Posted by: Pat M | March 25, 2007 1:53 PM
The whole thing is hilarious. The Chicago print media is apoplectic about reporting on the racist political operation that is Trinity, so a Jewish girl from New York has to come clean up their mess for them.
Wright is so self-deluded that he thinks the New York press needs to print his two hour sermon on the wonders of Obama, like anyone cares. She came for the juice, and left with the juice. End of story.
Obama's a fool and he hangs around with crooks and racists. Not ready for prime time, despite his favored minority status...
Posted by: Jerry | March 26, 2007 7:20 AM