Journalistic pride and prejudice

Investigative reporting is back.

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a journalist in possession of a byline must be in want of a scandal to expose. When Jane Austen wrote an opening sentence similar to that, she hadn’t encountered Barack “No Drama” Obama.

For eight years White House reporters knew that investigation of wrongdoing would make their colleagues mad. They chose to follow in regard to former President Obama a version of the Groucho Marx doctrine: “I never forget a face, but in your case I’d be glad to make an exception.”

On May 13, though, the website Common Dreams (“Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community”) ran a headline, “One Good Thing Donald Trump’s Presidency Has Done: Improved Journalism.” Watergate whistleblower John Dean says, “Journalism has never been better.” Former U.S. Rep. Harold Ford Jr. says about Trump, “He’s bringing journalism back.”

True, yet why does journalism have to be brought back? Why its eight-year slumber? Washington newshounds in mid-May bayed at President Trump for purportedly revealing secret information to a Russian official, but Instapundit collected a trove of Obama administration leaks that gained little attention: In 2010, revealing classified information about cyberattacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities. In 2011, outing the Navy SEAL unit that killed Osama bin Laden, along with the name of its ground commander. In 2014, exposing the CIA’s top Kabul operative. In 2016, offering Cuba’s Communist government U.S. intelligence information.

Washington is notoriously gossipy, but in May we saw a record number of anonymice scurrying around, leaving droppings, and then heading back to holes. The Washington Post has taken sourcery to the extreme. It now quotes anonymous sources talking about an anonymous person who may represent other anonymous persons, as in this sentence from May 18: “At least one senior staffer has begun privately talking to friends about what a post-White House job would look like, according to two people close to the staffer.”

WORLD stories and columns criticized both Trump and Hillary Clinton last fall before the election. Trump won, and we have given him the respect an elected president deserves. He won because of his pro-abortion opponent and because millions of evangelicals prioritized his commitment to nominate judicial conservatives: Liberals have only themselves to blame for the Constitution-twisting that made such appointments the No. 1 issue. Impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors, not to undermine an election verdict. Let’s wait to see if anything more substantial than gossip emerges, and let’s pray that Trump will not do more to undermine himself.

PRAYER, AS ALWAYS, IS ESSENTIAL—and so is journalistic training. Since May 15 seven members of WORLD’s staff have been teaching 27 young journalists at our 19th annual World Journalism Institute (WJI) college course. This year at Dordt College in Iowa we’re offering writing tips (such as how to avoid a semi-colonoscopy) and discussing big questions about the purpose of Biblical journalism.

Lots of older WORLD members are worried about the younger generation: “Are the kids OK?” is a frequently asked question. On social issues, judging by a survey to which the WJI students responded anonymously, the answer is yes. One hundred percent of our students called abortion morally wrong. (A Gallup survey showed 43 percent of Americans saying abortion is morally acceptable and 49 percent calling it morally wrong.)

The students also, with one exception, called homosexual relations and heterosexual adultery morally wrong and overwhelmingly opposed same-sex marriage. (Two-thirds of Americans termed adultery and gay or lesbian relations morally acceptable and called same-sex marriage as valid as traditional marriage.) A Pew survey found the American public split down the middle on the question “Would you rather have a smaller government and fewer services or a bigger government and more services?” Our students went for smaller government by a 25-2 margin.

Two of the findings might lead to thoughtful discussions between parents and children. Only 7 percent of the students said they had “a lot of confidence in the future of the U.S.” (The figure for the general populace: 41 percent.) And, while evangelicals remain largely supportive of President Trump, most of our students disapproved of his job performance.

Older WORLD readers can also receive WJI training. Next January in the Olasky living room in Austin, Texas, my wife and I plan to have our ninth annual intensive week of journalism instruction for WORLD members who would like to write occasionally for our magazine, website, or podcast.

We’ve enjoyed having 80 mid-career students over the years, 10 at a time. Some are doctors, teachers, engineers, or college journalists who took time off to raise kids, and others with writing ability just love WORLD and want to be part of it. The course emphasizes reporting and writing news and features. It’s not for those whose goal is to write devotionals, fiction, or poetry, or to be the next Andrée Seu Peterson: There’s only one of her.

Thirty WJI graduates are now on WORLD’s masthead on page 2. Others are occasional correspondents willing to be activated if something big (and probably bad) happens in their cities. If you’re interested, please get more information and apply at worldji.com.