Tag Archives: sharing

There’s no such thing as ‘alternative facts’. 5 ways to spot misinformation and stop sharing it online

Posted on by


Shutterstock

Mark Pearson, Griffith University

The blame for the recent assault on the US Capitol and President Donald Trump’s broader dismantling of democratic institutions and norms can be laid at least partly on misinformation and conspiracy theories.

Those who spread misinformation, like Trump himself, are exploiting people’s lack of media literacy — it’s easy to spread lies to people who are prone to believe what they read online without questioning it.

We are living in a dangerous age where the internet makes it possible to spread misinformation far and wide and most people lack the basic fact-checking abilities to discern fact from fiction — or, worse, the desire to develop a healthy skepticism at all.



Read more:
Stopping the spread of COVID-19 misinformation is the best 2021 New Year’s resolution

Journalists are trained in this sort of thing — that is, the responsible ones who are trying to counter misinformation with truth.

Here are five fundamental lessons from Journalism 101 that all citizens can learn to improve their media literacy and fact-checking skills:

1. Distinguishing verified facts from myths, rumours and opinions

Cold, hard facts are the building blocks for considered and reasonable opinions in politics, media and law.

And there are no such things as “alternative facts” — facts are facts. Just because a falsity has been repeated many times by important people and their affiliates does not make it true.

We cannot expect the average citizen to have the skills of an academic researcher, journalist or judge in determining the veracity of an asserted statement. However, we can teach people some basic strategies before they mistake mere assertions for actual facts.

Does a basic internet search show these assertions have been confirmed by usually reliable sources – such as non-partisan mainstream news organisations, government websites and expert academics?

Students are taught to look to the URL of more authoritative sites — such as .gov or .edu — as a good hint at the factual basis of an assertion.

Searches and hashtags in social media are much less reliable as verification tools because you could be fishing within the “bubble” (or “echo chamber”) of those who share common interests, fears and prejudices – and are more likely to be perpetuating myths and rumours.

2. Mixing up your media and social media diet

We need to be break out of our own “echo chambers” and our tendencies to access only the news and views of those who agree with us, on the topics that interest us and where we feel most comfortable.

For example, over much of the past five years, I have deliberately switched between various conservative and liberal media outlets when something important has happened in the US.

By looking at the coverage of the left- and right-wing media, I can hope to find a common set of facts both sides agree on — beyond the partisan rhetoric and spin. And if only one side is reporting something, I know to question this assertion and not just take it at face value.

3. Being skeptical and assessing the factual premise of an opinion

Journalism students learn to approach the claims of their sources with a “healthy skepticism”. For instance, if you are interviewing someone and they make what seems to be a bold or questionable claim, it’s good practice to pause and ask what facts the claim is based on.

Students are taught in media law this is the key to the fair comment defence to a defamation action. This permits us to publish defamatory opinions on matters of public interest as long as they are reasonably based on provable facts put forth by the publication.

The ABC’s Media Watch used this defence successfully (at trial and on appeal) when it criticised a Sydney Sun-Herald journalist’s reporting that claimed toxic materials had been found near a children’s playground.

This assessment of the factual basis of an opinion is not reserved for defamation lawyers – it is an exercise we can all undertake as we decide whether someone’s opinion deserves our serious attention and republication.



Read more:
Teaching children digital literacy skills helps them navigate and respond to misinformation

4. Exploring the background and motives of media and sources

A key skill in media literacy is the ability to look behind the veil of those who want our attention — media outlets, social media influencers and bloggers — to investigate their allegiances, sponsorships and business models.

For instance, these are some key questions to ask:

  • who is behind that think tank whose views you are retweeting?

  • who owns the online newspaper you read and what other commercial interests do they hold?

  • is your media diet dominated by news produced from the same corporate entity?

  • why does someone need to be so loud or insulting in their commentary; is this indicative of their neglect of important facts that might counter their view?

  • what might an individual or company have to gain or lose by taking a position on an issue, and how might that influence their opinion?

Just because someone has an agenda does not mean their facts are wrong — but it is a good reason to be even more skeptical in your verification processes.



Read more:
Why is it so hard to stop COVID-19 misinformation spreading on social media?

5. Reflecting and verifying before sharing

We live in an era of instant republication. We immediately retweet and share content we see on social media, often without even having read it thoroughly, let alone having fact-checked it.

Mindful reflection before pressing that sharing button would allow you to ask yourself, “Why am I even choosing to share this material?”

You could also help shore up democracy by engaging in the fact-checking processes mentioned above to avoid being part of the problem by spreading misinformation.The Conversation

Mark Pearson, Professor of Journalism and Social Media, Griffith Centre for Social and Cultural Research, Griffith University, Griffith University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Australians want to support government use and sharing of data, but don’t trust their data will be safe

Posted on by


File 20190226 150715 ffa5h7.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
A new survey reveals community attitudes towards the use of personal data by government and researchers.
Shutterstock

Nicholas Biddle, Australian National University and Matthew Gray, Australian National University

Never has more data been held about us by government or companies that we interact with. Never has this data been so useful for analytical purposes.

But with such opportunities come risks and challenges. If personal data is going to be used for research and policy purposes, we need effective data governance arrangements in place, and community support (social licence) for this data to be used.

The ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods has recently undertaken a survey of a representative sample of Australians to learn their views about about how personal data is used, stored and shared.

While Australians report a high level of support for the government to use and share data, there is less confidence that the government has the right safeguards in place or can be trusted with people’s data.



Read more:
Soft terms like ‘open’ and ‘sharing’ don’t tell the true story of your data

What government should do with data

In the ANUPoll survey of more than 2,000 Australian adults (available for download at the Australian Data Archive) we asked:

On the whole, do you think the Commonwealth Government should or should not be able to do the following?

Six potential data uses were given.

Do you think the Commonwealth Government should or should not be able to … ?
ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods Working Paper

Overall, Australians are supportive of the Australian government using data for purposes such as allocating resources to those who need it the most, and ensuring people are not claiming benefits to which they are not entitled.

They were slightly less supportive about providing data to researchers, though most still agreed or strongly agreed that it was worthwhile.

Perceptions of government data use

Community attitudes to the use of data by government are tied to perceptions about whether the government can keep personal data secure, and whether it’s behaving in a transparent and trustworthy manner.

To measure views of the Australian population on these issues, respondents were told:

Following are a number of statements about the Australian government and the data it holds about Australian residents.

They were then asked to what extent they agreed or disagreed that the Australian government:

  • could respond quickly and effectively to a data breach
  • has the ability to prevent data being hacked or leaked
  • can be trusted to use data responsibly
  • is open and honest about how data are collected, used and shared.

Respondents did not express strong support for the view that the Australian government is able to protect people’s data, or is using data in an appropriate way.

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Australian Government … ?
ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods Working Paper



Read more:
What are tech companies doing about ethical use of data? Not much

We also asked respondents to:

[think] about the data about you that the Australian Government might currently hold, such as your income tax data, social security records, or use of health services.

We then asked for their level of concern about five specific forms of data breaches or misuse of their own personal data.

We found that there are considerable concerns about different forms of data breaches or misuse.

More than 70% of respondents were concerned or very concerned about the accidental release of personal information, deliberate hacking of government systems, and data being provided to consultants or private sector organisations who may misuse the data.

Level of concern about specific forms of data breaches or misuse of a person’s own data …
ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods Working Paper

More than 60% were concerned or very concerned about their data being used by the Australian government to make unfair decisions. And more than half were concerned or very concerned about their data being provided to academic researchers who may misuse their information.



Read more:
Facebook’s data lockdown is a disaster for academic researchers

Trust in government to manage data

The data environment in Australia is changing rapidly. More digital information about us is being created, captured, stored and shared than ever before, and there is a greater capacity to link information across multiple sources of data, and across multiple time periods.

While this creates opportunities, it also creates the risk that the data will be used in a way that is not in our best interests.

There is policy debate at the moment about how data should be used and shared. If we don’t make use of the data available, that has costs in terms of worse service delivery and less effective government. So, locking data up is not a cost-free option.

But sharing data or making data available in a way that breaches people’s privacy can be harmful to individuals, and may generate a significant (and legitimate) public backlash. This would reduce the chance of data being made available in any form, and mean that the potential benefits of improving the wellbeing of Australians are lost.

If government, researchers and private companies want to be able to make use of the richness of the new data age, there is an urgent and continuing need to build up trust across the population, and to put policies in place that reassure consumers and users of government services.The Conversation

Nicholas Biddle, Associate Professor, ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University and Matthew Gray, Director, ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods, Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How to stop haemorrhaging data on Facebook

Posted on by


File 20180405 189801 1wbjtyg.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
Every time you open an app, click a link, like a post, read an article, hover over an ad, or connect to someone, you are generating data.
Shutterstock

Belinda Barnet, Swinburne University of Technology

If you are one of 2.2 billion Facebook users worldwide, you have probably been alarmed by the recent coverage of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, a story that began when The Guardian revealed 50 million (now thought to be 87 million) user profiles had been retrieved and shared without the consent of users.

Though the #deletefacebook campaign has gained momentum on Twitter, it is simply not practical for most of us to delete our accounts. It is technically difficult to do, and given that one quarter of the human population is on the platform, there is an undeniable social cost for being absent.



Read more:
Why we should all cut the Facebook cord. Or should we?

It is also not possible to use or even to have a Facebook profile without giving up at least some data: every time you open the app, click a link, like a post, hover over an ad, or connect to someone, you are generating data. This particular type of data is not something you can control, because Facebook considers such data its property.

Every service has a price, and the price for being on Facebook is your data.

However, you can remain on Facebook (and other social media platforms like it) without haemorrhaging data. If you want stay in touch with those old school friends – despite the fact you will probably never see them again – here’s what you can do, step by step. The following instructions are tailored to Facebook settings on mobile.

Your location

The first place to start is with the device you are holding in your hand.
Facebook requests access to your GPS location by default, and unless you were reading the fine print when you installed the application (if you are that one person please tell me where you find the time), it will currently have access.

This means that whenever you open the app it knows where you are, and unless you have changed your location sharing setting from “Always” to “Never” or “Only while using”, it can track your location when you’re not using the app as well.

To keep your daily movements to yourself, go into Settings on Apple iPhone or Android, go to Location Services, and turn off or select “Never” for Facebook.

While you’re there, check for other social media apps with location access (like Twitter and Instagram) and consider changing them to “Never”.

Remember that pictures from your phone are GPS tagged too, so if you intend to share them on Facebook, revoke access to GPS for your camera as well.

Your content

The next thing to do is to control who can see what you post, who can see private information like your email address and phone number, and then apply these settings in retrospect to everything you’ve already posted.

Facebook has a “Privacy Shortcuts” tab under Settings, but we are going to start in Account Settings > Privacy.

You control who sees what you post, and who sees the people and pages you follow, by limiting the audience here.

Change “Who can see your future posts” and “Who can see the people and pages you follow” to “Only Friends”.

In the same menu, if you scroll down, you will see a setting called “Do you want search engines outside of Facebook to link to your profile?” Select No.

After you have made these changes, scroll down and limit the audience for past posts. Apply the new setting to all past posts, even though Facebook will try to alarm you. “The only way to undo this is to change the audience of each post one at a time! Oh my Goodness! You’ll need to change 1,700 posts over ten years.” Ignore your fears and click Limit.



Read more:
It’s time for third-party data brokers to emerge from the shadows

Next go in to Privacy Shortcuts – this is on the navigation bar below Settings. Then select Privacy Checkup. Limit who can see your personal information (date of birth, email address, phone number, place of birth if you provided it) to “Only Me”.

Third party apps

Every time you use Facebook to “login” to a service or application you are granting both Facebook and the third-party service access to your data.

Facebook has pledged to investigate and change this recently as a result of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, but in the meantime, it is best not to use Facebook to login to third party services. That includes Bingo Bash unfortunately.

The third screen of Privacy Checkup shows you which apps have access to your data at present. Delete any that you don’t recognise or that are unnecessary.

In the final step we will be turning off “Facebook integration” altogether. This is optional. If you choose to do this, it will revoke permission for all previous apps, plugins, and websites that have access to your data. It will also prevent your friends from harvesting your data for their apps.

In this case you don’t need to delete individual apps as they will all disappear.

Turning off Facebook integration

If you want to be as secure as it is possible to be on Facebook, you can revoke third-party access to your content completely. This means turning off all apps, plugins and websites.

If you take this step Facebook won’t be able to receive information about your use of apps outside of Facebook and apps won’t be able to receive your Facebook data.

If you’re a business this is not a good idea as you will need it to advertise and to test apps. This is for personal pages.

It may make life a little more difficult for you in that your next purchase from Farfetch will require you to set up your own account rather than just harvest your profile. Your Klout score may drop because it can’t see Facebook and that might feel terrible.

Remember this setting only applies to the data you post and provide yourself. The signals you generate using Facebook (what you like, click on, read) will still belong to Facebook and will be used to tailor advertising.

To turn off Facebook integration, go into Settings, then Apps. Select Apps, websites and games.



Read more:
We need to talk about the data we give freely of ourselves online and why it’s useful

Facebook will warn you about all the Farmville updates you will miss and how you will have a hard time logging in to The Guardian without Facebook. Ignore this and select “Turn off”.

The ConversationWell done. Your data is now as secure as it is possible to be on Facebook. Remember, though, that everything you do on the platform still generates data.

Belinda Barnet, Senior Lecturer in Media and Communications, Swinburne University of Technology

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Digg: Sadly Dug its Own Grave

Posted on by

Interfaith Sharing: A Disturbing Practice

Posted on by

The article below concerns the sharing of pulpits between Muslims, Jews and Christians in a display of religious freedom. This is a disturbing practice that should not be followed by evangelical and reformed churches. The pulpit is a place for the proclaimation of the truth and is not to be polluted by every wind of doctrine. A more thorough treatment of this issue is certainly warranted but will not be given here at this time.

I am totally for religious freedom and believe that Muslims and Jews, as well as those of other faiths, have a right to worship according to their conscience. This does not mean that I believe their faiths to be right or acceptable before God, only that they must stand or fall before God and not I. However, as Christians we are obligated to remain steadfast in the truth and to not open any avenue in our churches for that which is not the truth.

For more see:
http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-jews-and-muslims-to-share-pulpits-50752/

 

Lao Officials Arrest 11 Christians at Gunpoint

Posted on by

Three leaders remain in prison; Christians in three villages forced to renounce their faith.

DUBLIN, January 6 (CDN) — Following the arrest of 11 Christians at gunpoint on Tuesday (Jan. 4), three house church leaders remain behind bars for “holding a secret meeting,” according to advocacy group Human Rights Watch for Lao Religious Freedom (HRWLRF).

Lao authorities today released six of the house church Christians, including two children ages 4 and 8, from Khammouan Provincial Prison, central Laos. Two other men were released yesterday (Jan. 5).

The charge against the three church leaders is a political offense punishable by law, HRWLRF said. It identified the three men only by their given names as Pastor Wanna from Nakoon village church, Chanlai from Tonglar village church and Kan from nearby Nahin village church, all in Hinboun district, Khammouan Province.

The other eight Christians initially arrested were identified as Sompon, his wife and two children, along with a man identified only as Wantorn, all from the capital, Vientiane; Bounma and Kay from Nakoon village church, and Pastor Sipan from Dongthai church in Takkek district, Khammouan Province.

Authorities first detained the 11 Christians at gunpoint on Tuesday (Jan. 4) after they gathered at Wanna’s home for delayed Christmas celebrations, according to HRWLRF.

In December, Wanna informed authorities that church members would gather at his home on Wednesday (Jan. 5) to celebrate Christmas, in line with official celebrations by the government-approved Lao Evangelical Church scheduled between Dec. 5 and Jan. 15.

A truckload of district police officers with guns cocked and ready to shoot burst into Wanna’s house after dark on Tuesday (Jan. 4) shouting, “Stop! Nobody move!” They then forcibly detained the 11 who were quietly sharing an evening meal and charged them with conducting a “secret meeting” without approval.

Police officers released two of the Christians yesterday (Jan. 5) and moved the remaining nine to Khammouan Provincial Prison. A further six, including Sompon’s wife and children, were released today, leaving only three key leaders from Khammouan house churches behind bars.

HRWLRF has called for urgent advocacy for the three, on the grounds that officials have charged them with a political offense that may lead to harsh prison terms.

 

Oppression, Re-Education, Imprisonment

Oppression in Hinboun district, Khammouan Province began in earnest after residents of three villages professed faith in Christ, according to HRWLRF.

In 2008 a handful of Christians began meeting at Wanna’s house in Nakoon village. By 2009 the number had grown to 105 people, or 25families. During that time, local officials repeatedly interrogated Wanna, threatening him with arrest and imprisonment if he did not renounce his faith and cease encouraging others to believe in God.

Wanna, however, continued to hold meetings at his home until officials arrested and imprisoned him last May. Authorities then rounded up the church members and subjected them to several days of re-education, informing them that, “We have fought the Americans for many years, and now you are being deceived and caught by their traps.”

The Christians were then forced to sign documents renouncing their faith.

After releasing Wanna in October, officials warned him to practice his faith in private and hold no further meetings at his home. Wanna ignored these warnings, and several families joined him for Sunday worship services.

In December, Wanna informed village authorities that the church would hold Christmas celebrations at his home on Jan. 5, in line with plans by the official Evangelical Church of Laos to hold Christmas celebrations between Dec. 5 and Jan. 15.

Another Christian, Chanlai (also known as Yohan), began sharing his faith in 2008 with the residents of Tonglar village, some five kilometers (nearly three miles) away from Nakoon. By 2009, a total of 15 families had professed faith and began worshiping in Chanlai’s home. Authorities arrested Chanlai along with Wanna last May, charging Chanlai with influencing residents to believe in God and holding worship meetings in his home.

Following Chanlai’s arrest, officials detained the other 14 families for a day of re-education and forced them to sign documents renouncing their faith.

In October, when Chanlai and Wanna were released, authorities warned Chanlai that he should desist from holding worship meetings or “be killed.”

Another house church was established in 2008 in nearby Nahin village, around five kilometers (nearly three miles) from Nakoon village, with 10 families or 58 Christians meeting at the home of church leader Kan.

Nahin village authorities early last year subjected the Christians to five days of re-education, announcing that, “Whoever believes in the Christian faith is caught in the trap of the enemy!” They also declared that worship meetings were considered to be “secret meetings,” a term with political connotations punishable by law.

Under great duress, five families or a total of 27 Christians in Nahin then signed documents renouncing their faith; the others refused, but they refrained from meeting together for fear of further punishment until Wanna was released last October.

Report from Compass Direct News

Pro-Democracy Advocate Released from Prison

Posted on by

Her new Christian faith deepens; authorities allow evangelist Luis Palau to address pastors.

HO CHI MINH CITY, March 30 (CDN) — A Protestant prisoner of conscience who had called for democratic freedoms in Vietnam was released earlier this month after serving a three-year sentence for “propagandizing to destroy the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.”

Attorney Le Thi Cong Nhan’s sentence had been reduced by one year after an international outcry over her sentencing. She was released on March 6. Remaining in prison for another year is her colleague, Christian lawyer Nguyen Van Dai.

The 31-year-old Cong Nhan had also supported a labor union that sought to be independent. Now serving an additional three-year house arrest sentence, Cong Nhan said in a surprisingly frank interview with Voice of America’s Vietnamese language broadcast on March 9 that she has no intention of giving up her struggle for a just and free Vietnam and accepts that there may be a further price to pay.

Cong Nhan, arrested in March 2007, received a Vietnamese Bible from a visiting delegation of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom – with official permission from Vietnam’s minister of Public Security – early in her incarceration, but she had to struggle constantly to retain it. Twice she went on a hunger strike when authorities took the Bible away from her.

She had become a Christian shortly before her arrest, and she told Voice of America that while in prison she was able to read the entire Bible.

“In prison the Lord became my closest friend, my teacher, and the one who carried my burdens with me,” she said. “When I was released from prison, I received many words of praise and of love and respect – I became a bit worried about this, as I do not consider myself worthy of such. I believe I must live an even better and more worthy life.”

Her prison experience has confirmed her calling and faith, she said.

“As a direct result of my prison experience, I am more convinced than ever that the path that I have chosen is the right one,” Cong Nhan said. “Before prison I was just like a thin arrow, but now I have become a strong fort.”

Luis Palau Allowed to Speak

While Christians in several parts of Vietnam are still subject to abuse from local officials, the country’s national authorities have continued to allow high-profile Christian events. On March 17, renowned U.S. evangelist Luis Palau was allowed to address more than 400 pastors in a day-long event at the New World Hotel in Ho Chi Minh City.

Palau, who had arrived in Hanoi with his entourage on March 13, had addressed nearly 200 Hanoi area pastors at an evening event at the Hanoi Hilton on March 14. The two events were streamed live on http://www.hoithanh.com, a popular website that reports on Protestant news in Vietnam. Hundreds of Vietnamese in Vietnam and abroad were estimated to have watched the presentations.

The events were deemed significant, if not historic, by Vietnam’s Christian leaders. Very rarely is a prominent foreign Protestant leader allowed to address Vietnamese leaders, especially one from the United States.

The events were significant also in that they brought together leaders from virtually all segments of Vietnam’s fractured and sometimes conflicted Protestant groups, Christian leaders said. The gatherings included leaders of open churches and house churches, registered and unregistered churches, and urban and even ethnic minority groups from Vietnam’s remote mountainous regions.

Two representatives of a Mennonite church headed by activist pastor Nguyen Hong Quang, however, were turned away by police. 

Palau and Mike McIntosh, pastor of San Diego mega-church Horizon Christian Fellowship, strongly challenged the Vietnamese church leaders to strive for unity. The assembled pastors were challenged to put aside past conflicts and suspicions for the sake of the Kingdom of God in Vietnam, with Palau saying that unity was a requirement for God’s blessing on their churches and nation.

Some Vietnamese leaders responded by expressing remorse for their divisions and committed to start working toward reconciliation.

Organizers and participants said they hope such short events will lead to larger gains. Though the Luis Palau Association had originally planned for a two-day event for 2,000 pastors, most agreed this was an unprecedented first step toward a bigger goal. With an invitation from all segments of the Protestant community in Vietnam in hand, the Luis Palau Association is prepared to help organize evangelistic festivals in Vietnam in 2011, the centenary of Protestantism in Vietnam.

“There is still a long way to go, but we are seeing miracles piling up,” said one senior Vietnamese leader. “It could happen!”

One prominent overseas Vietnamese leader wondered if Palau’s visit to Vietnam could be compared to Billy Graham’s visit to Moscow during the Soviet Communist era.

Also sharing testimonies during the March 17 event were Rick Colsen, a top Intel executive, and John Dalton, Secretary of the Navy under President Clinton.

Report from Compass Direct News 

Nigeria arrests hundreds in connection with Christian slaughter

Posted on by

Nigerian police arrested 164 people in connection with a mostly-Christian slaughter of 500, reports MNN. There are 41 charges of terrorism and homicide. With a movement toward justice, is the trouble over?

Todd Nettleton with Voice of the Martyrs likens the violence to a wildfire. "The government or the military comes in and puts a lid on it for a while, and then there’s another breakout. "

Former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo has said that the violence is fueled more by ethnic, social, and economic problems than by religion.

That may be true, but Nettleton adds: "The level of violence in this case–the fact that it seems to have been a very coordinated effort against Christians–says probably it will happen sooner rather than later, and that it will break out somewhere else."

Some have claimed the attacks were in retaliation for the killing of more than 300 Muslims earlier this year around the same city. Then, on March 17, Muslim herdsmen disguised as soldiers butchered nearly a dozen Christians in two villages near Jos, setting some of them ablaze.

Mainly women and children were killed in both massacres. There are reports that indicate youth are calling for revenge against the Muslims.

VOM supports the persecuted church there. Their team is helping hundreds of Nigerian pastors who continue to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ despite persecution. VOM also provides food, clothing and medical aid to Nigerian Christians who are attacked by Muslim extremists.

The threat of violence won’t stop their work. Nettleton says, "There is going to be some care given to how and where they meet, especially in light of fact that these were clearly coordinated attacks. But there is still going to be a Christian presence there, and there are going to be believers who are reaching out, who are sharing their faith, and who are praying, even for their persecutors."

Report from the Christian Telegraph 

Why Bhutan’s Royalists Fear Christianity

Posted on by

Social, political factors behind country’s reluctance to allow Christianity to grow

THIMPHU, Bhutan, February 1 (CDN) — Bars, pubs and discos have become legal in Bhutan – a cause of concern for the older generation – but construction of worship buildings other than Buddhist or Hindu temples is still prohibited.

The prohibition remains in force even though Christians abide by Bhutan’s codes of conduct, speaking the Dzongkha language as well as the Nepali language at church gatherings, and wearing the national dress.

The National Assembly of Bhutan banned the practice of non-Buddhist and non-Hindu religions through edicts in 1969 and in 1979. But Christians do meet for Sunday worship, with attendance of more than 100 Christians in an underground church not unusual.

Why are Christians seen as a greater threat to the culture of the nation than the “democracy disco culture,” as one government official described the emerging subculture among the Bhutanese youth? It is believed that Christianity will create religious tensions in the country.

“There are reasons why Christianity is not being tolerated in the country,” said a former high government official who requested anonymity. “Look at the communal tensions in India and Nepal. Christianity can divide the Bhutanese society as well.”

He mentioned two incidents that appeared in the Bhutanese press last year, one in which 13 Christians allegedly hanged a woman they had accused of being a witch, and a suicide by a Hindu man who reportedly left a note saying his Christian wife and children were pressuring him to convert.

Christians here said these were isolated incidents that they strongly condemned.

“A majority of believers in Bhutan are not educated and are from lower economic backgrounds,” said the pastor of an underground church. “When open preaching is not allowed, this is what happens.”

Sound Christian teaching remains lacking, he said. There is a tremendous need for good Christian teaching and general education among the Christians in Bhutan, said the pastor.

“But little can be done given the restrictions we face here.”

Christians are only allowed to pray if someone is sick among their acquaintances, he added.

The government also fears that Christianity could cause societal tensions because of the general misconception that Christians lure others to the faith with money; converts are viewed with suspicion, said a government official on condition of anonymity.

“There should be one religion in one nation,” said the official, adding that religious freedom should be allowed only after educating people.

Threat from Within

Bhutanese officials are no strangers to religious conflict.

“You must also understand that the kind of Buddhism practiced in Bhutan is a minority sect within the two Buddhist divisions,” said the former government official.

A majority of Buddhists in Bhutan practice Vajrayāna Buddhism, also known as Tantric Buddhism, and belong to the larger Mahayana sect, one of the two major divisions of the religion along with the Theravada sect.

Theravada Buddhism has a widespread following in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asian countries, including Burma, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia. Mahayana is practiced in a few East Asian countries, including Japan.

Unlike Theravada, which is more individualistic in its motivation, Mahayana Buddhism involves an aspiration to achieve enlightenment not only for one’s own sake, but for the sake of all “sentient” beings.

“There is a perceived threat to the Buddhist sect in Bhutan from the more powerful Theravada division,” said the source, without divulging more about the clash within Buddhism. “In such a scenario, how can you expect the government to willingly open doors to Christianity, which too is a threat?”

Of Bhutan’s more than 670,000 people, Christians are estimated to range in number between 3,000 and 6,000. Around 75 percent of the people practice Buddhism, and roughly 22 percent are Hindus, mostly of Nepali origin.

Monarchy and Buddhism

Religion is so closely linked to the monarchy in Bhutan that one cannot exist without the other.

The national flag of Bhutan, which consists of a white dragon over a yellow and orange background, also has religion in it. While the yellow half represents civil and political powers of the King, the orange signifies monastic traditions of Buddha’s teachings.

The religious link is protected in the new constitution, which was adopted in March 2008. Article 2 notes that the dual powers of religion and politics shall be unified in the person of the king, “who, as a Buddhist, shall be the upholder of the Chhoe-sid,” the traditional dual system of governance characterized by the sharing of power between the religious and political heads of the country.

Given that the king embodies religious and political authority, the common people worship him.

Additionally, Buddhism is woven into the national fabric. Bhutan is the only country in the world that employs a “Gross National Happiness” (GNH) equation to measure its people’s level of happiness, and the GNH assumes that all citizens are Buddhist. Respondents to the GNH survey are asked questions concerning “spiritual activities like meditation and prayers, and consideration of karmic effects in daily life.”

The introduction of democracy in Bhutan did not involve disturbing the religious and cultural status quo. While former King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who served from 1972 to 2006, brought democracy to Bhutan without any demand for it, people believe his intentions were far from transforming the country into a full democracy.

It is believed that the political turmoil in neighboring Nepal partly influenced King Singye Wangchuck’s decision to make the country, at least on paper, a constitutional monarchy after over 100 years of absolute monarchy. A decade-long civil war led by the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist – which took more than 12,000 lives – is believed to be behind the abolition of the royal parliamentary system and the adoption of a socialist republic in Nepal. In 2006 the then-king of Nepal, Gyanendra, agreed to relinquish sovereign power to the people.

All sources in Bhutan confirmed that the present king, Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck (selected in 2006 but not crowned until 2008), was still the supreme ruler. Perhaps this is why both the ruling Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (Bhutan Peace and Prosperity) Party and the opposition People’s Democratic Party are royalists.

Pictures of kings of Bhutan are found everywhere in the country – in homes, shops, hotels, underground churches and on street walls. Many large posters with the kings’ pictures carrying the inscription “Kings of our Hearts” can be seen along the streets. Even public buses have “Our Kings Forever” painted on them.

“But you cannot expect things to change overnight,” said the former government official. “It’s not wise to allow development without any bridle. Things are improving slowly.

Added an optimistic source, “Freedom in the real sense of the word and in all spheres is bound to come to Bhutan. It’s just a matter of time.”

Report from Compass Direct News 

Australian missionary arrested in Andhra Pradesh State, India

Posted on by

An Australian missionary was arrested on false charges of “forceful conversion” by the Andhra Pradesh State Police on November 24, 2009 at Utnur in Andhra Pradesh state, India, reports James Varghese, special correspondent in India for ASSIST News Service.

According to the Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC) the trouble erupted when at around 7.30 in the evening of the 24th, Paul Jemison (40), an Australian missionary accompanied by Joy Carol, daughter of a local Pastor Premanandam (50) had gone to an Industrial Training Institute (ITI) hostel campus for a movie screening for about 200 students.

The source reported that, as the movie ended at around 8.30 pm, Jemison shared about the "Love of Christ" to the students present. As he was sharing from the Word, a mob of 20 Hindu radicals suddenly barged into the event and accused him of indulging in “forceful conversion” and abused him for his foreign origin.

The source also said that the Hindu radicals then dragged him to the nearest Police station and filed a complaint against him of “forceful conversions to Christianity.”

Missionary Paul Jemison called the Australian embassy to check the possibilities to his quick release.

ANS has learned that he was detained in the station until late that night and later released.

The source said that Hindu radicals and Locals of the town have warned Pastor Premanandam and his daughter Joy Carol not to invite anymore foreign missionaries to the town.

Report from the Christian Telegraph