Broadcaster calls Archbishop a media moaner
-17/06/05
Respected UK television news broadcaster Krishnan Guru-Murthy, who appears regularly on Channel 4 news, has attacked the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, for criticising the media while apparently ducking out of opportunities it offers to present his views.
Writing in todayís Metro newspaper under the headline ëRowan Moaní, Guru-Murthy says that the Archbishopís ìassault on the media this week for our distortions, cynicism and aggression would have more credibility if he actually appeared on the media from time to time.î
The newsreader, who elsewhere declares of his own profession that ìreading an autocue requires little thoughtî, says that Archbishop Williams does few interviews and even fewer debates on television.
This fact sits ill with the Archbishopís position as a major spiritual leader and with his claim to wish to address the moral conscience of the nation, claims Guru Murthy.
He continues: ìIf he [Archbishop Williams] wants to change the world, surely he should engage with it? A slot on Channel 4 news is always waiting.î
Dr Williams gave a patiently argued lecture at Lambeth Palace on Wednesday 15 June entitled ìThe Media: Public Interest and Common Goodî. It was widely seen as a chastisement, but that only relays part off the story.
The Archbishop rounded up an examination of present-day journalism by saying that ìa flourishing, morally credible media is a vital component in the maintenance of genuinely public talk, argument about common good.î
But, he continued, ìsuch talk is not in rich supply just now, and it is only fair to ask what share of responsibility the media has for this.î
However, Dr Williams also declared that ìit is not fair to treat media as a scapegoat. The relation with the wider society is mutual; societies to some extent have the media they deserve and license.î
ìCan a more realistic, less fevered, more modestly provisional journalistic practice recover a sense of how to nurture public conversation in a mature democracy ñ even of a truth that sets people free?î, he asked.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has been criticised on a number of occasions recently for picking and choosing when and where he will participate in what some commentators themselves call ìthe media circusî.
For example, he declined to take part in a programme called ëThe New Ten Commandmentsí, which featured representatives of major faith groups debating the place of the commandments in modern life and discussing whether a new set of rues is needed. It is believed he feared that it would trivialize the issues.
In February of this year The Guardian newspaper said in an editorial that Dr Williams should ìspeak upî more. It added that and if he did so, ìsome of the attractiveness of his personality, so much described before he took office and so little displayed since then, will shine through all the television lights.î
It seems that Channel 4 is especially annoyed by the Archbishopís non-appearance. The Ten Commandments programme was aired there too, and another established anchor, Jon Snow (himself the son of a bishop) has previously accused Dr Williams of ìrunning scaredî.
Observers have noted that, perhaps to balance his public perception as a self-admitted ìbearded leftyî, the Archbishop of Canterburyís press team have pushed him more into the conservative media than on liberal staples such as The Guardian and Channel 4 of late.
But this has not always worked for Dr Williams. The Archbishop was himself misrepresented by a right-wing national newspaper at the beginning of the year, when they suggested that he doubted God’s existence following the tsunami disaster.
Despite the fact that the newspaper’s then editor privately acknowledged in a letter seen by Ekklesia that the headline distorted the views of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Sunday Telegraph never issued a public correction.
Broadcaster calls Archbishop a media moaner
-17/06/05
Respected UK television news broadcaster Krishnan Guru-Murthy, who appears regularly on Channel 4 news, has attacked the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, for criticising the media while apparently ducking out of opportunities it offers to present his views.
Writing in today’s Metro newspaper under the headline ëRowan Moan’, Guru-Murthy says that the Archbishop’s ‘assault on the media this week for our distortions, cynicism and aggression would have more credibility if he actually appeared on the media from time to time.’
The newsreader, who elsewhere declares of his own profession that ‘reading an autocue requires little thought’, says that Archbishop Williams does few interviews and even fewer debates on television.
This fact sits ill with the Archbishop’s position as a major spiritual leader and with his claim to wish to address the moral conscience of the nation, claims Guru Murthy.
He continues: ‘If he [Archbishop Williams] wants to change the world, surely he should engage with it? A slot on Channel 4 news is always waiting.’
Dr Williams gave a patiently argued lecture at Lambeth Palace on Wednesday 15 June entitled ‘The Media: Public Interest and Common Good’. It was widely seen as a chastisement, but that only relays part off the story.
The Archbishop rounded up an examination of present-day journalism by saying that ‘a flourishing, morally credible media is a vital component in the maintenance of genuinely public talk, argument about common good.’
But, he continued, ‘such talk is not in rich supply just now, and it is only fair to ask what share of responsibility the media has for this.’
However, Dr Williams also declared that ‘it is not fair to treat media as a scapegoat. The relation with the wider society is mutual; societies to some extent have the media they deserve and license.’
‘Can a more realistic, less fevered, more modestly provisional journalistic practice recover a sense of how to nurture public conversation in a mature democracy – even of a truth that sets people free?’, he asked.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has been criticised on a number of occasions recently for picking and choosing when and where he will participate in what some commentators themselves call ‘the media circus’.
For example, he declined to take part in a programme called ëThe New Ten Commandments’, which featured representatives of major faith groups debating the place of the commandments in modern life and discussing whether a new set of rues is needed. It is believed he feared that it would trivialize the issues.
In February of this year The Guardian newspaper said in an editorial that Dr Williams should ‘speak up’ more. It added that and if he did so, ‘some of the attractiveness of his personality, so much described before he took office and so little displayed since then, will shine through all the television lights.’
It seems that Channel 4 is especially annoyed by the Archbishop’s non-appearance. The Ten Commandments programme was aired there too, and another established anchor, Jon Snow (himself the son of a bishop) has previously accused Dr Williams of ‘running scared’.
Observers have noted that, perhaps to balance his public perception as a self-admitted ‘bearded lefty’, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s press team have pushed him more into the conservative media than on liberal staples such as The Guardian and Channel 4 of late.
But this has not always worked for Dr Williams. The Archbishop was himself misrepresented by a right-wing national newspaper at the beginning of the year, when they suggested that he doubted God’s existence following the tsunami disaster.
Despite the fact that the newspaper’s then editor privately acknowledged in a letter seen by Ekklesia that the headline distorted the views of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Sunday Telegraph never issued a public correction.