The prosecution had their day with the leaked audio of the LifeSiteNews board meeting. Numerous accusations (without proof) were leveled against John Henry Westen by several board members. Many who listened to the leaked audio jumped on the bandwagon, finding him guilty after listening to only one side of the story. A lawyer who reviewed the audio urged caution and pointed out that the leaked audio was like a courtroom where only the prosecution was allowed to present its case.
Well, the defense has responded and it looks like vindication for Westen, although he mentions that the internal investigation is ongoing. That not a bad thing. Self-examination is always good whether its the examination of conscience, a review of the organization, or both. I hope all the drama we've seen brings about an improvement in relationships among the staff and a clear and holy direction for the organization. May their mission statement be a simple one -- to do God's will in all things.
I always thought the problem at LSN was likely a question of personality conflicts, managerial style and, perhaps pride and inflated egos. I still think that's probably true. But I hope the arguing parties can imitate Paul and Barnabas. When they disagreed over the involvement of John Mark in the apostolate, they separated. There is no indication of animosity in the story. Perhaps it was God's way of sending his spokesmen off to different places to expand the mission.
I want to be clear. There are certain things at LifeSiteNews that bother me, e.g. promoting unapproved apparitions. Nevertheless, I wish everyone at LifeSiteNews well and look forward to an ever better Catholic media outlet than before. Shall we all pray for that?
It's sad when these things happen. I've seen it many times. People who say they're looking out for the mission/organization/ group fall into the trap of jumping on the bandwagon of negativity. Suddenly, explanations disappear and actions seem awfully suspicious all by themselves when devoid of context.
ReplyDeleteMy husband once was part of an upper management meeting to evaluate staff. All of a sudden a man my husband had worked with and had no indication he was a problem was a problem. It was nothing major in any one example but people started "remembering" things once one person made a complaint like one time he was late with a report (no context as to why). It was as if everyone wanted to be someone who had something to contribute. That sounds to me similar to Weston's accusers' claims (although more substantial than late reports). People also like to embellish what they know so it looks like they are in the know. Also, things that weren't an issue often become an issue when feelings get hurt or someone doesn't get their way like the claims about his daughters. It's certainly not uncommon for charities/nonprofits to be a family affair (where else you are going to get free labor aka as volunteers) and often they end up hiring family if they get enough funding.
Even if the board had a legitimate reason to remove Weston their behavior and what's gone on sure doesn't look Catholic.
Yes Mary Ann, amen to that. The superb Christian attorney and blog writer of Coffee and Covid, said not long ago on an unrelated topic, if you publicly defame someone, you better have proof. It is especially serious if you affect their income. The law takes this seriously. Lifesite and others basically it seems, fooled around and found out. Suddenly, humility abounds as it became clear John Henry was defamed publicly and it wasnt a good idea. All involved should be embarrassed except John Henry, pretty much. A public witch hunt and lesson in foolishness, also mob bullying, for the rest of us. Hopefully LifeSite can mend fences and get back to business. They hurt their own brand wirh this unprofessional and silly nonsense. Theres a way to do things.
ReplyDeleteSo they were lying about JHW's activities (!). My comments on his tenure were all conditioned on "if they are telling the truth,"--and it turns out they were not.
ReplyDeleteBlatant lying is a tactic of the political Left, but apparently not reserved to them.