Jose Carillo's Forum

MY MEDIA ENGLISH WATCH

If you are a new user, click here to
read the Overview to this section

Team up with me in My Media English Watch!

I am inviting Forum members to team up with me in doing My Media English Watch. This way, we can further widen this Forum’s dragnet for bad or questionable English usage in both the print media and broadcast media, thus giving more teeth to our campaign to encourage them to continuously improve their English. All you need to do is pinpoint every serious English misuse you encounter while reading your favorite newspaper or viewing your favorite network or cable TV programs. Just tell me about the English misuse and I will do a grammar critique of it.

Read the guidelines and house rules for joining My Media English Watch!

When religion unduly intrudes into governance and news reporting

This morning (February 19), I read with terrible disquiet this news story in the Philippine Daily Inquirer:

Storm heaven with prayers, Filipinos urged

MANILA, Philippines—Catholic bishops on Friday said they are praying and hoping for a change of heart among Chinese officials that would allow the reprieve of three Filipinos facing execution for drug trafficking even as President Aquino called on all Filipinos from all religions to unite in prayer for their condemned countrymen.

“I call on all Filipinos, led by our religious leaders of all faiths to unite ourselves in prayer beginning today at sundown, at the pealing of the bell for the Angelus or during the most quiet and meditative times consistent with our respective faiths,” Mr. Aquino said in a statement read for him by deputy spokesperson Abigail Valte.

“All our prayers will soar to the heavens to touch the heart of God, the god who ‘will make a way when there seems to be no way,’” he said.

The first thing that struck me was the utterly flawed semantics and licentiousness of that story’s headline:

Storm heaven with prayers, Filipinos urged 

Storm heaven with prayers? What kind of journalism is this? All along I thought that the word “prayer” was universally understood as a supplication to God in word or thought, addressed to Him ever so humbly and earnestly, for a much-wanted wish or favor. Now this headline, in reference to the impending execution in China of three convicted drug mules who happen to be Filipinos, is reporting that all Filipinos are being urged to attack heaven with prayers—which means to compel God by brute force to spare the lives of the three convicted criminals, or else!

This, I must say, is not only semantically reckless but also an outright heretical thing for anyone to say, particularly for a respectable newspaper, in a predominantly Roman Catholic country like the Philippines. For whether used literally or figuratively, the verb “storm” can only mean doing an impetuous, angry, and violent act. Take a look at the various definitions of “storm” in the Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary:

storm
Function: verb
Date: 15th century

intransitive verb 
1 a : to blow with violence  b : to rain, hail, snow, or sleet vigorously
2 : to attack by storm  <stormed ashore at zero hour>
3 : to be in or to exhibit a violent passion  : RAGE  <storming at the unusual delay>
4 : to rush about or move impetuously, violently, or angrily  <the mob stormed through the streets>
transitive verb   : to attack, take, or win over by storm  <storm a fort>
synonyms see ATTACK    

Now, from a journalistic standpoint, the next question that comes to mind is this: Did the news story proper itself warrant that use of such violent language in the headline?

From the standpoint of the Roman Catholic clergy, I don’t think so. The lead sentence of the story itself clearly says that Catholic bishops said “they are praying and hoping for a change of heart among Chinese officials that would allow the reprieve of three Filipinos facing execution for drug trafficking.” Nothing in that very level-headed statement indicates that they were urging the faithful to storm the heavens with their prayers.

So what could have prompted the Inquirer’s headline writer to think that the Filipinos were being urged to storm heaven with prayers to compel God to instruct the Chinese government to grant a reprieve for the doomed drug traffickers?

I have a feeling that it was this strange-sounding statement read for President Benigno Aquino III by Malacañang deputy spokesperson Abigail Valte:

“I call on all Filipinos, led by our religious leaders of all faiths to unite ourselves in prayer beginning today at sundown, at the pealing of the bell for the Angelus or during the most quiet and meditative times consistent with our respective faiths…All our prayers will soar to the heavens to touch the heart of God, the god who ‘will make a way when there seems to be no way.’”

This stirring call to the Filipinos still runs far short of urging them to storm heaven with prayers, of course, but I think its rhetoric is too intense and soaring and its prescriptions for prayer too procedurally and ritually specific for a statement coming from the President himself. The tenor of that statement certainly makes it sound like the President is enjoining the people to pray in the context of a doomsday scenario like, say, the total annihilation of mankind. It certainly beats the language of the Roman Catholic bishops themselves in ecclesiastic fervor and religiosity, and, truth to tell, it doesn’t sound like a well-thought-out statement from a secular government. Indeed, considering that the President was reported to have been laid low by fever for the second day yesterday (February 18), I get this nagging feeling that he never had the opportunity to review that statement and ponder its implications.

Consider the following bewildering elements in that statement from Malacañang: “unite ourselves in prayer beginning today at sundown” (Why sundown in particular and not any other time of the day?); “at the pealing of the bell for the Angelus…” (Why must the Filipinos, particularly non-Catholics, be instructed to specifically wait for the pealing of the Angelus bell to say the requested prayers?); “during the most quiet and meditative times consistent with our respective faiths” (Why must the Filipinos wait for “the most quiet and meditative times” to pray? Why the prescription for consistency with “our respective faiths”? Will such micromanagement of saying prayers make any difference?); “All our prayers will soar to the heavens to touch the heart of God…” (How and by what measure, in the name of God, can anyone say this with confidence?); and “…the god who ‘will make a way when there seems to be no way’” (This needless qualifying phrase implies that there are other gods who won’t make a way “when there seems to be no way”—something that, of course, runs counter to the country’s predominant monotheism and the President’s being a Roman Catholic.).     

It’s clear that both the Malacañang communication staff and the Inquirer editors and headline writer had gone semantically and rhetorically overboard in this particular news story, each badly succumbing to the heat of the burning issue. This need not happen, though. I submit that as frontliners in the public communication effort, no matter what news may come, they should be much more precise and circumspect with their facts and with their use of language. Indeed, I believe that more than any other social institution, government and media should know that, as one truism goes, “A society is generally as lax as its language” and should always be on guard against committing and abetting such laxity.

Click to post a comment to this critique

View the complete list of postings in this section




Copyright © 2010 by Aperture Web Development. All rights reserved.

Page best viewed with:

Mozilla FirefoxGoogle Chrome

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!

Page last modified: 20 February, 2011, 3:15 a.m.