There is one image which has seemed to “greet” me each morning as I have skimmed through my news headlines over the past few weeks.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Facebook, Twitter and news alert services were buzzing with stories about each and every mention of Cardinal Pell made at the Royal Commission.
It was hard for me to understand why Cardinal Pell was dominating the media. As you would have seen from our reports in recent weeks, I watched all of the Royal Commission hearings in Ballarat. Between 4 and 5 hours of testimony was heard each day, and probably no more than 10 minutes of it mentioned Cardinal Pell on any given day.
Still, “George Pell” kept trending.
Apart from my general frustration for sensationalism and truth-stretching, there are other problems with the media focus being on Cardinal George Pell.
1. It takes attention away from the stories that survivors are bravely telling
There were some horrific stories which, as I was listening to them, I thought would surely dominate headlines.
For example, the very first witness spoke of being drugged and raped until he bled from age five, of not learning his name until age 11 because the nuns would call him “Number 29”, of being taken in to the “priest’s side” of the confessional and molested by that priest while he was hearing Saturday afternoon confessions (and charging penitents for absolution.)
This man, from a very young age, witnessed priests and religious who were supposed to represent Christ desecrate the dignity of the human person, the sacredness of the child and the integrity of the sacraments.
Despite this, he somehow managed to live a life for others. With his wife, he has taken in 26 foster children, many of them who had lived in institutionalised care, and helped them buy homes, find jobs and build relationships. How he had the goodwill and the hope to do this is nothing short of heroic; of sanctity.
Surely his courage is a more worthy story?
2. It distracts from the purpose of the Commission
The terms of reference for the Commission are to inquire into institutional responses to child sexual abuse and related matters, including what should be done better by institutions and government, how to achieve best practice in reporting and responding to reports, reducing impediments to responding appropriately, and redress matters.
Within this, the Commission needs to focus the inquiry and recommendations on systemic issues (informed by individual cases) and the adequacy of the response by institutions and their officials.
Cardinal Pell’s part in the Ballarat cases is relevant to the last part, “the adequacy of the response by institutions and their officials.” Given that the Ballarat case deals largely with Cardinal Pell’s time as a young priest, it is a stretch to use his current role in the Church to retrospectively identify him as representative of the institutional response back then.
The media focus on Cardinal Pell distracts us from the Commission’s real (and vital) purpose.
3. It can distract us from actually making things better
The intense focus on Cardinal Pell can also distract us from making things better.
As an example, on Monday of last week, Associate Professor Dr Carolyn Quadrio gave testimony about the needs of trauma victims, particularly survivors of child sexual abuse. She told us that boys externalise their behaviour (often by acting out), while girls internalise it. This meant that boys were more likely to be treated as delinquents rather than being referred for psychological assistance. She spoke about signs that might indicate a child is being abused. These included learning difficulties, not wanting to attend school, difficulties sleeping, aggressive or overtly sexual behaviour and more.
She spoke about the needs of adult survivors, and called for a holistic approach to healthcare for survivors and compulsory training in trauma for all psychologists and psychiatrists. These are concrete issues and specific action items for all of us, and could be really useful in coming to the assistance of abuse survivors.
There were around 30 news articles about Dr Quadrio’s evidence, and most of them had to do with what she said about celibacy (ie, her view that it is not causative) rather than about what can be done to help survivors. Over the same day as Dr Quadrio’s testimony was reported, there were 300-odd articles about Cardinal Pell. No one following the news about the Commission that day would have come away with any more information about the community’s role in preventing, detecting and assisting in the area of child sexual abuse.
4. It delays healing for victims and survivors
Something which struck me were the number of survivors whose abuse had no connection, however tangential, with Cardinal Pell who were nevertheless calling for him to be brought back to Australia and face the Commission/justice. It seems to me that somehow, all of the media focus placed on Cardinal Pell has left survivors feeling that justice will only be done (and healing will only begin) when Cardinal Pell is sacked, imprisoned or both.
There is a real problem with this. And that is that Cardinal Pell hasn’t committed a crime, despite countless suggestions in the media to the contrary. Many, if not all of the allegations levelled against the Cardinal in recent weeks have been made many times, including at the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry. Many were first raised more than 10 years ago. If there was any evidence that these were accurate, something would have been done by now.
By building the expectation of Cardinal Pell being found responsible of wrongdoing, the media is unwittingly encouraging survivors to equate justice with his demise. If (when) this does not happen, survivors will feel as if they have been denied justice, making it difficult for healing to commence.
5. It unjustly attacks an innocent man
Finally, the repetition of unproven (and even disproven) claims against Cardinal Pell attacks an innocent (and good) man. His style may not be to the liking of the media or others (including some Catholics). His presence as a strong and unwavering moral voice in the public square may have many people wishing for his downfall so that they have a reason to ignore the moral teachings of the Church. But disliking his style and/or his message is absolutely no excuse to unjustly accuse him of wrongdoing.
Many people will say that the injustice shown to Cardinal Pell is not anywhere near the pain inflicted upon and still felt by victims and survivors. This is true. But that some others have hurt more is a poor excuse for others, particularly the media, to throw stones at the man. They should be better than that.
The post Five Things Wrong with the Media Attention on Cardinal Pell appeared first on Restless Press.