| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Does the Camera Lie?; or do the people who point it? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 15:26 (471 Views) | |
| OsullivanB | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 15:26 Post #1 |
|
This is an interesting example of how the media feel free to treat us cavalierly, and present a distorted image, whether maliciously or not. http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=16710 |
| "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer | |
![]() |
|
| tomais | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 16:20 Post #2 |
|
The camera has been led to,lie-remember the missing faces in Moscow during big marches- gaps along the line from uncle joe up to an including todays airbrushing z celebrities from size 16 to size 9;+ the digital manipulation that is the skill of the person in the editing room. Such examples as quoted may be seen on news programmes- especially if one knows the locality. Watch out ! Who are the current owners of the UK press? May be who ,is,the current owner? |
![]() |
|
| PJD | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 16:31 Post #3 |
|
"Watch out ! Who are the current owners of the UK press? May be who ,is,the current owner? " Tomais - To me its rather like the line "All the Presidents Men" used in the film of that name re Watergate. (by chance watched the video tape of it a few days ago) What OsB has directed us to must have required 'planning' from the start! PJD |
![]() |
|
| Derekap | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 17:00 Post #4 |
|
When the film about Queen Elizabeth I was made, the coronation scene was filmed in YorkMinster, not Westminster Abbey. Only a portion of a congregation was actually present and filmed. By computer the Minster was filled to make it look crowded. Hollywood uses back-projection of film to deceive us. During a tour of Universal Studios in Los Angeles we saw how they 'arrange' certain scenes. Edited by Derekap, Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 17:09.
|
| Derekap | |
![]() |
|
| OsullivanB | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 17:02 Post #5 |
|
Perhaps what most disturbed me about the piece that prompted this thread was the fact that I wasn't even a tiny bit surprised about what I read. I suspect that my (non) response is not unusual. We neither trust what we see nor are we surprised that we can't. |
| "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer | |
![]() |
|
| Paduan | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 17:31 Post #6 |
|
I am not remotely surprised, since the BBC's coverage of the impending visit of the Holy Father is permanently laced with insinuations of him being personal culpable for events he never had any exposure to or authority over. The BBC is institutionally anti-Catholic, as that program on Sunday morning demonstrated (which I turned off in disgust, lest I were to throw things at a TV I cannot afford to replace). |
| Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis. | |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 17:37 Post #7 |
|
Cardinal Ratzinger was head of the CDF, the body responsible for disciplining wayward clergy. And which didn't. One exaggeration does nothing to counter the opposite exaggeration. Truth will out. Gerry Edited by Gerard, Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 20:28.
|
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 20:36 Post #8 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Article reproduced in full, with permission |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 20:48 Post #9 |
![]()
Administrator
|
St John Vianney parish was asked at the last minute, if a reporter could interview parishioners on a Sunday morning. The parish priest gave permission. http://www.rcdow.org.uk/westgreen/news/default_viewnews.asp?parish_id=88005&news_ref=1673
The reporter did not arrive at the pre-arranged time of 10.30 am. He arrived after Mass had begun, and before it was over interviewed Penelope Middelboe, who is not a parishioner, outside the church. Film had been taken of the 11 am Mass. Everything was set up for the televised report give the impression opinions expressed were those of parishioners, but the letter writer says "The report does not show any of our parishioners expressing their opinions. So this could be understood that those parishioners who were filmed leaving the church shared the views of what the reporter referred to as ‘ordinary Catholics’.?" The camera deceived. The parish priest could hardly observe every detail, or raise objections, whilst he was offering Mass. The congregation were inside, praying, while a non parishioner was interviewed outdoors, with the church used as a backdrop. Film of the Mass would reinforce the impression she was a member of the parish. It stinks. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| K.T.B. | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 21:27 Post #10 |
|
Ugh! If true, and it looks like it is, what a galling thought that Robert Piggott has acted in this unprofessional way whilst being paid a presumably good salary, to which I have contributed through my blooming TV licence fee! |
![]() |
|
| Paduan | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 22:05 Post #11 |
|
And very few cases ever came before the CDF and when they did, they concentrated mostly on Canon Law requirements for laicisation, to be interpreted in light of the instructions by the then Pope regarding the rules for dispensing priests from their vows. It was not then the CDF's job to take responsibility for abuser-priests: that responsibility lay with the dioceses, whose bishops demonstrably failed. The Church operates though according to set laws, and the Vatican can't, without changing Canon Law, act unilaterally just as and when it feels like it. When the authority to chase abusers properly was finally granted, Cardinal Ratzinger used it at once. He spoke out at the time of JPII's death about 'filth' in the Church. He cannot be said to be personally culpable and anyone Catholic who says otherwise has swallowed the anti-Catholic media's insinuations hook, line and sinker. And here we come back to the main question: the camera lies because the media wants it to. And then good Catholics are disillusioned about their own Church and their own Pope and the Devil gains another small victory as doubt and suspicion creep yet further into our hearts. For a dispassionate outsider, it's practically impossible to discern the truth about how the Catholic church functions in practical and organisational ways, since the Media simply makes it up as it goes along. Edited by Paduan, Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 22:05.
|
| Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis. | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 14. September 2010, 22:33 Post #12 |
![]()
Administrator
|
See the end of the ICN article
Jo Siedlaka who is editor of Independent Catholic News, is no fool. I do not think she would risk publishing the report, without checking up. If it were not correct that parish priest of St John Vianney's would have something to say! BBC may not be aware the ICN is transmitted world wide, this article will go to parishes, individuals, mission stations. http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=1News will travel fast and some may ask themselves "Can we trust BBC?" |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Wednesday, 15. September 2010, 09:03 Post #13 |
|
Paduan, The media exaggerates in one direction. Some catholics exaggerate in the opposite direction. That is why the interested outsider has such a difficult time. For the record - I consider that the head of the CDF and the Head of the Church carry not only authority but also responsibility for what happens on their watch. I do not consider that I have swallowed anti-catholic propaganda. I consider that i have swallowed the Gospel. Gerry |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| OsullivanB | Wednesday, 15. September 2010, 10:37 Post #14 |
|
I agree that those leaders are responsible i.e. answerable for what happens on their watch. I don't think that our Pope has shirked that butthere remains much to be done. But they are not necessarily culpable for what happens on their watch. That is where outsiders are tending to get it wrong. |
| "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer | |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Wednesday, 15. September 2010, 15:09 Post #15 |
|
Actually I consider him culpable of contributing to the culture of secrecy and the culture of protecting clergy from the police/law/prison. Gerry Edited by Gerard, Wednesday, 15. September 2010, 15:14.
|
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







7:53 PM Jul 11