theguardian.com
Emails Expose Saints Executive's Role in Shaping Credibly Accused Clergy List
Emails reveal that Greg Bensel, senior vice president of communications for the New Orleans Saints, advised the New Orleans Archdiocese on media relations before the November 2018 release of a list of credibly accused clergy, and actively participated in removing names from that list, contradicting public statements by both the Saints and the Archdiocese.
- What specific actions did Greg Bensel take to influence the composition of the New Orleans Archdiocese's list of credibly accused clergy, and what impact did these actions have?
- The New Orleans Archdiocese released a list of credibly accused clergy in November 2018. Prior to the release, Greg Bensel, senior vice president of communications for the New Orleans Saints, offered media relations advice to the Archdiocese. Emails reveal Bensel's direct involvement in removing names from the list.
- How did the communication strategies employed by the Archdiocese and the Saints organization influence public perception of the clergy abuse scandal, and what were the long-term consequences?
- Bensel's communications expertise was sought by the Archdiocese to manage the media fallout from the list's release. Emails show Bensel actively participated in strategic communications planning with the Archbishop and his staff, including a conference call with District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro that resulted in the removal of certain individuals from the list. This contradicts public statements denying external influence on the list's composition.
- What systemic issues within the Archdiocese or the broader Catholic Church structure facilitated the events surrounding the list's creation and subsequent controversy, and what measures could prevent similar situations in the future?
- The discrepancy between public statements denying external influence and internal emails revealing Bensel's direct involvement raises questions about transparency and accountability. Bensel's actions highlight the potential for conflicts of interest when individuals with expertise in crisis communications advise religious institutions facing scandals. The incident underscores the importance of independent oversight in such sensitive matters.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing consistently favors the narrative that denies any manipulation of the list. Public statements are presented prominently, while the incriminating emails are relegated to a secondary position. The headline and introductory statements could be structured to emphasize the discrepancies between public claims and email evidence, offering a more balanced perspective.
Language Bias
The language used in reporting the public statements is largely neutral. However, the presentation of the emails uses language that implies wrongdoing. For instance, the phrase "incriminating emails" carries a negative connotation. More neutral language could be used, such as "contradictory emails" or "emails revealing differing accounts".
Bias by Omission
The provided text highlights a significant bias by omission. Crucially, the emails directly contradict the public statements made by Gayle Benson, Greg Bensel, and the Archdiocese. The emails reveal direct involvement in removing names from the list, which is explicitly denied in the public statements. This omission is not simply a matter of space or brevity; it is a deliberate concealment of key information that significantly alters public perception of the events.
False Dichotomy
The narrative presents a false dichotomy between the public statements denying any influence on the list and the emails revealing active involvement in shaping its content. This simplification ignores the complexity of the situation and obscures the truth.
Sustainable Development Goals
The emails and statements reveal an attempt to influence the list of credibly accused clergy, undermining transparency and accountability in addressing the abuse scandal. This interferes with justice for victims and erodes public trust in institutions.