During the days of the Third Extraordinary Synod and later, it was
covered in several of the news portals and news papers around the world. It is remarkable that the entire world is
eager to know more about the Catholic Church and Pope Francis. It shows the global importance of the Church
and her values. The earlier post titled,
“Why there was an Extraordinary Synod?”, had explained the need and the content of the recent Extraordinary Synod. Then, how did the “secular” media cover the
Extraordinary Synod?
The “secular” Media, under the pretense
of “covering” the truth, narrowed the Extraordinary Synod down to the following five points: a) III
Extraordinary Synod is the decision making body, b) It has failed to
accept homosexual marriages, c) It did not consider the situation of
divorced couples, d) There are divisions among the Extraordinary Synod and e) Pope has lost his primacy over the
college of Bishops in the Synod. Since these particular topics did not
even constitute 10% of the issues discussed (Instrumentum Laboris - Working instrument) in the 15 day Extraordinary Synod,
it brings us to question the intention of the media. Why did they project this
image of the Extraordinary Synod and
dilute it to discuss only these particular issues? It makes us
doubt that the secular media is plagued with vested
interests.
Is it not the intention of these agents
to diminish the importance of the Extraordinary Synod and bring these issues
into the lime light so that they could garner unwanted attention? One
example of the unethical reporting of the “secular” media: The positive reporting on the shocking and horrible incident of Ms. Nirbhaya, in Delhi, India in 2012, resulted public agitations and movements all
around the nation. But the story of the incident repeats itself in different
dramatic forms. Why does the same “secular” media not give same importance
to these incidents? Is the “secular” media making us think and
dance according to the script written by them for their vested interests?
Is it not the same method being ployed in the case of 'COVERING' the
Extraordinary Synod?