How the Media Whitewashes Muslim Persecution of Christians

by Raymond Ibrahim

The Gatestone Institute

When it comes to Muslim persecution of Christians, the mainstream media (MSM) has a long paper trail of obfuscating; while they eventually do state the bare-bone facts — if they ever report on a story in the first place, which is rare — they do so after creating and sustaining an aura of moral relativism that minimizes the Muslim role.

False Moral Equivalency

As previously discussed, one of the most obvious ways is to evoke “sectarian strife” between Muslims and Christians, a phrase that conjures images of two equally matched — equally abused and abusive — adversaries fighting. This hardly suffices to describe reality: Muslim majorities persecuting largely passive Christian minorities.

Most recently, for instance, in the context of the well-documented suffering of Christians in Egypt, an NPR report declared “In Egypt, growing tensions between Muslims and Christians have led to sporadic violence [initiated by whom?]. Many Egyptians blame the interreligious strife on hooligans [who?] taking advantage of absent or weak security forces. Others believe it’s because of a deep-seated mistrust between Muslims and the minority Christian community [how did the “mistrust” originate?].” Though the report does highlight cases where Christians are victimized, the tone throughout suggests that examples of Muslims victimized by Christians could just as easily have been found (not true). Even the title of the report is “In Egypt, Christian-Muslim Tension Is on the Rise”; the accompanying photo is of a group of angry Christians, one militantly holding a cross aloft — not Muslims destroying crosses, which is what prompts the former to such displays of religious solidarity.

Two more strategies that fall under the MSM’s umbrella of obfuscating and minimizing Islam’s role — strategies that the reader should become acquainted with — appeared in recent reports dealing with the jihadi group Boko Haram and its ongoing genocide of Nigeria’s Christians.

First, some context: Boko Haram, whose full name in Arabic is “Sunnis for Da’wa [Islamization] and Jihad,” is a terrorist organization dedicated to the overthrow of the secular government and establishment of Sharia law (sound familiar?). It has been slaughtering Christians for years, with an uptick since last December’s Christmas day church bombing, which left 40 Christians dead, followed by its New Year ultimatum that all Christians must evacuate northern regions or die — an ultimatum Boko Haram has been living up to, as hardly a day goes by without a terrorist attack on Christians or churches, most recently, last Sunday’s Easter day church attack that killed nearly 50.

Blurring the Line between Persecutor and Victim

Now consider some MSM strategies. The first one is to frame the conflict between Muslims and Christians in a way that blurs the line between persecutor and victim, for example, this recent BBC report on one of Boko Haram’s many church attacks that left three Christians dead, including a toddler. After stating the bare-bone facts, the report goes on to describe how “the bombing sparked a riot by Christian youths, with reports that at least two Muslims were killed in the violence. The two men were dragged off their bikes after being stopped at a roadblock set up by the rioters, police said. A row of Muslim-owned shops was also burned…” The report goes on and on, with a special section about “very angry” Christians, till one all but confuses victims with persecutors, forgetting what the Christians are “very angry” about in the first place: unprovoked and nonstop terror attacks on their churches, and the murder of their women and children.

This is reminiscent of the Egyptian New Year’s Eve church bombing that left over 20 Christians dead: the MSM reported it, but under headlines like “Christians clash with police in Egypt after attack on churchgoers kills 21″(Washington Post) and “Clashes grow as Egyptians remain angry after attack”(New York Times) — again, as if frustrated Christians lashing out against wholesale slaughter is as newsworthy as the slaughter itself; as if their angry reaction “evens” everything up.

Dissembling the Perpetrators’ Motivation

The second MSM strategy involves dissembling over the jihadis’ motivation. An AFP report describing a different Boko Haram church attack — which also killed three Christians during Sunday service — does a fair job reporting the facts. But then it concludes with the following sentence: “Violence blamed on Boko Haram, whose goals remain largely unclear, has since 2009 claimed more than 1,000 lives, including more than 300 this year, according to figures tallied by AFP and rights groups.”

Although Boko Haram has been howling its straightforward goals for a decade — enforcing Sharia law and, in conjunction, subjugating if not eliminating Nigeria’s Christians — here is the MSM claiming ignorance about these goals (earlier the New York Times described Boko Haram’s goals as “senseless” — even as the group continues justifying them on doctrinal grounds). One would have thought that a decade after the jihadi attacks of 9/11 — in light of all the subsequent images of Muslims in militant attire shouting distinctly Islamic slogans such as “Allahu Akbar!” and calling for Sharia law and the subjugation of “infidels” — reporters would by now know what their motivation and goals are.

Of course, the media’s obfuscation serves a purpose: it leaves the way open for the politically correct, MSM-approved motivations for Muslim violence: “political oppression,” “poverty,” “frustration,” and so forth. From here, one can see why politicians like former US president Bill Clinton cite “poverty” as “what’s fueling all this stuff” (a reference to Boko Haram’s slaughter of Christians), or the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs insistence that “religion is not driving extremist violence” in Nigeria, which he said in response to last Sunday’s Easter day church bombing.

In short, while the MSM may report the most frugal facts concerning Christian persecution, they utilize their entire arsenal of semantic games, key phrases, and convenient omissions that uphold the traditional narrative — that Muslim violence is anything but a byproduct of the Islamic indoctrination of intolerance.

©2012 Raymond Ibrahim

Share This

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *