May 01, 2007

Hamil Harris responds…

Posted by: Chris

Washington Post reporter Hamil Harris has responded to my post this weekend on his story about pending federal hate crime legislation. I took Harris to task for reporting a claim by a consortium of black pastors that the Matthew Shepard Act could be used to throw ministers in jail for preaching homosexuality is a sin. Harris quoted black pastors and others who oppose and support the bill, but never tested the central claim that the hate crime law could criminalize hate speech, much less less speech from a pulpit.

Because the story so failed to question the ministers' claims, I did a bit of digging on Harris the reporter, and offered in my post a couple of curious examples where he introduced his own religious faith into professional situations — including an email to Marion Barry's press flak that was uncovered through a Freedom of Information Act request by Washington City Paper. It raised in my own mind questions about Harris' objectivity or possible sympathy to the complaining black pastors.

In response to my post, Harris wrote:

I learned the hard way that even one's personal email's can be public information. I guess it is against the law to offer a king word to somebody. Does this make a person less of a reporter because of an email. This is a very serious issue that deserves a much bigger story. But it is not fair to offer a critique when you know nothing about how what was written got in the paper. I am sure the dialogue will continue.

Anyone who's spent time as a reporter or an editor knows the limitations that deadline and available space can have on a story, so I grant Harris probably lacked the room to tell the story properly. But even a cursory mention that the bill's supporters challenge the ministers claim would have been welcome. 

I'm also pleased to see that he believes the issue deserves "a much bigger story." I hope he writes it soon; the issue certainly remains "in play." In a press release today, the Human Rights Campaign challenged the premise of the black pastors' complaint:

One of the most frequently promoted lies by the opposition is that the hate crimes law will make anti-gay bigots criminally liable for their hate speech.  While it is certainly un-American and un-Christian to embrace a message of hate, the religious right has nothing to fear from the hate crimes bill as it applies only to acts of violence.  Nothing in this act would prohibit the lawful expression of one's deeply held religious beliefs.

"It's no surprise the religious right is so concerned about hate speech - for them hate appears to be a cottage industry," [said Joe Solmonese, HRC president,]  "But they have nothing to fear.  Even after the hate crimes legislation is passed, the religious right will continue to have the federally protected right to preach hatred."

You won't catch me saying this very often, but well said, Joe.

Of course no one expects Harris or any other journalist to simply accept HRC's defense of the bill, any more than the pastors' claim should have gone unchallenged. But with a House vote on the bill looming on Thursday, the time is now for more complete coverage.

Tags: anti-gay hate crimes