I have a journalism question, one that will require some time travel. Let’s flash back to the 2021 football game between the Brigham Young Cougars and the Baylor Bears, which was played in Waco, Texas, an interesting city known to many as “Jerusalem on the Brazos.”
After the first BYU score, a significant number of Baylor students are heard chanting “F*** the Mormons!” over and over. Or maybe, since we are talking about folks from a Baptist university, the chant is “Convert the Mormons!” The chant doesn’t focus on the “Cougars,” but on BYU’s obvious heritage with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The chants were strong enough to be heard on broadcast media and, within minutes, there are clear audio recordings posted on social media.
My question, a which I asked during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in): Would this nasty, crude event be considered a valid news story? In national coverage, would the religious ties of the two schools — soon to be rivals in the Big 12 — be discussed? In other words, would this be a religion-news story, as well as a sports story?
I think it’s pretty obvious that the answers would be “yes” and, again, “yes.”
This brings us, of course, to two BYU sports stories from recent weeks — one that received massive national coverage and the other that, well, didn’t get nearly as much ink. I think it’s valid to ask "Why?’ in both cases.
Before I share some links to coverage of the two stories, let’s pause and consider this related Religion News Service report: “Nearly 200 religious colleges deemed ‘unsafe’ for LGBTQ students by Campus Pride.” Here is the overture:
Dozens of religious universities across the country, including Seattle Pacific University in Washington and Brigham Young University in Utah, were listed as unsafe and discriminatory campuses for LGBTQ students by Campus Pride, a national organization advocating for inclusive colleges and universities.
Fewer than 10 of the 193 schools on the list released Thursday (Sept. 8), were not religiously affiliated or did not list a religious affiliation, according to Campus Pride.
The lengthy Campus Pride report on BYU opens with this statement (the shorter Baylor item appears here):
Brigham Young University has qualified for the Worst List because it has an established and well-documented history of anti-LGBTQ discrimination that endangers victims of sexual assault and has resulted in a call for it to not be included as a Big 12 school.
The key word, of course, is “endangers.”
The big issue, of course, is that BYU is a doctrinally-defined private school with a lifestyle covenant requiring students, staff and faculty to strive to defend (or, at the very least, not to attack) the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Both liberal and conservative private schools tend to have moral and cultural beliefs of this kind — often clearly stated in public documents. The problem, of course, is that BYU’s doctrines clash with those of Campus Pride.
A relevant question: Does this affect news coverage?
The recent BYU sports story that received major national coverage and, thus, will be familiar to many readers, was summarized in a report by the independent (as opposed to LDS-linked) Salt Lake City Tribune, which began like this:
Duke women’s volleyball player Rachel Richardson was repeatedly called a racial slur by a fan at BYU’s Smith Fieldhouse on Friday night, her family says.
Lesa Pamplin, Richardson’s godmother, said every time Richardson served the ball during the match between Duke and BYU, a fan in the BYU student section shouted the racial slur. At one point in the match, Pamplin said, Richardson was also “threatened by a white male.”
A follow-up Tribune report — as the story exploded into national media — added:
Rachel Richardson, the Duke University volleyball player who was repeatedly called a racial slur at BYU’s Smith Fieldhouse on Friday, said BYU failed in its initial response to the situation.
In Richardson’s first public comments since the match between BYU and Duke … in Provo, the sophomore said in a statement that BYU did not create a safe environment for the players. Also, she said BYU’s immediate response following the game was inadequate.
“Both officials and BYU’s coaching staff were made aware of the incident during the game, but failed to take the necessary steps to stop the unacceptable behavior and create a safe environment,” Richardson wrote in a statement she posted Sunday on Twitter. “As a result, my teammates and I had to struggle just to get through the rest of the game. ... They also failed to adequately address the situation immediately following the game when it was brought to their attention again.”
However, a problem soon emerged — in some publications.
As all journalists know, we now live in a world packed with smartphones and safety-related surveillance cameras (as well as streamed audio for many or even most public events). In this case, BYU officials and a conservative student newspaper on campus began studying digital audio and video from the BYU-Duke contest and could not find evidence of racist remarks, let alone chants threatening violence (click here and then here for Tribune follow-ups).
The conservative New York Post offered this report: “BYU student newspaper scoops left-wing media in Duke volleyball racial-slur saga.” Here is a chunk of that report:
A college volleyball player alleged spectators hurled racist abuse at her, but the claims were never proven — and it took a student newspaper to expose the truth as major left-wing media outlets ate up the tale.
The racist saga involving Brigham Young University first made national headlines late last month when Duke University sophomore Rachel Richardson went public with allegations that she had been subjected to racist slurs every time she served during a volleyball match in Provo, Utah, on Aug. 26.
But BYU dropped a bombshell last week when it revealed that its “extensive” investigation into the matter, which involved reviewing multiple videos and CCTV, had found zero evidence to support 19-year-old Richardson’s claims. The university also issued an apology and overturned a ban on the unidentified fan who Duke officials had claimed was responsible for hurling the racist abuse at Richardson.
During the podcast, I asked a basic journalism question: Did professionals from other mainstream newsrooms attempt to study the digital evidence available linked to this important story? Why or why not?
Most newsrooms that covered the charges of BYU racism fell silence at this point.
There was a solid National Public Radio report that covered both sides of this debate. Did this Illinois NPR report go national? I could not find other links suggesting that it did (I will be glad to update this post if others can find URLs that I missed).
Meanwhile, the Washington Post offered a long, interesting story about the BYU statements: “BYU says probe found no evidence of racial slurs at Duke volleyball player.” Here is a crucial passage that discusses the digital materials linked to the investigation:
BYU said … its investigation did not find “any evidence to corroborate the allegation that fans engaged in racial heckling or uttered racial slurs at the event.”
“We reviewed all available video and audio recordings, including security footage and raw footage from all camera angles taken by BYUtv of the match, with broadcasting audio removed (to ensure that the noise from the stands could be heard more clearly),” the school said in a statement. “We also reached out to more than 50 individuals who attended the event: Duke athletic department personnel and student-athletes, BYU athletic department personnel and student-athletes, event security and management and fans who were in the arena that evening, including many of the fans in the on-court student section.” …
“There will be some who assume we are being selective in our review,” the school said. “To the contrary, we have tried to be as thorough as possible in our investigation, and we renew our invitation for anyone with evidence contrary to our findings to come forward and share it.”
But the fallout from the accusations continued, the Post noted:
After the incident, the South Carolina women’s basketball team canceled a home-and-home series against the Cougars. The Gamecocks were scheduled to start the season at home against the Cougars on Nov. 7, then play in Provo, Utah, during the 2023-24 season.
“As a head coach, my job is to do what’s best for my players and staff,” South Carolina Coach Dawn Staley said in a statement released by South Carolina last week. “The incident at BYU has led me to reevaluate our home-and-home, and I don’t feel that this is the right time for us to engage in this series.”
This brings us to the second BYU sports story, which received little or no national coverage. This was the story that led to my BYU vs. Baylor time-travel questions at the top of this post.
It’s hard, in this case, to offer links to coverage that, well, didn’t happen.
This time, coverage didn’t kick into (low) gear until this story went political, with protests by the governor of Utah, which was covered by Fox News. That, and the social-media buzz, led to apologies from a network of Oregon fans and University of Oregon officials.
It’s important that ESPN did a late report: “BYU, 'grateful for those who are willing to come together,' thanks Oregon for its apology after anti-Mormon chants at football game.” The coverage was very brief on Sports Center. It would be interesting to compare the time given the BYU-Duke story with the BYU-Oregon story. The ESPN online story did note:
One BYU official told ESPN … , "It's not the first place we've heard things like that."
Last year, USC apologized for an "offensive chant" directed at members of the Mormon faith that it said came from the student section during BYU's 35-31 win over the Trojans at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.
To its credit, CNN also did a story about the Oregon apology, as opposed to immediate coverage of the incident itself: “University of Oregon apologizes for ‘disgraceful chant’ at football game.”
The big question: What were these conflicts all about? Is BYU’s future in doubt as a member of the Big 12?
As is often the case, it was hard to find news coverage that went below the surface of these controversies or, in many cases, even bothered to seek views and (I stress) actual evidence cited by those on both sides.
The Washington Post, however, offered a commentary by historian Matthew Bowman of Claremont Graduate University in Claremont, Calif. The headline: “An obscene anti-Mormon chant marks a grim irony in the church’s history.” At the end of that analysis there was this:
… Brigham Young University’s masters’ program in speech-language pathology was subjected to an accreditation review due to the university’s determination that treating transgender students in the program’s clinic was against the university’s religious mission.
And, of course, though a BYU investigation said it found no evidence to support the story, a Duke volleyball player’s claim that students shouted racial slurs at her during a recent game at BYU has shined light on the church’s troubled history with race.
Put bluntly, the LDS church has found itself, willingly or not, on the side of cultural issues decidedly not favored by most young people in the United States.
OK, “most young people in the United States” is one thing. How about young professionals in elite American newsrooms?
Please note that I am asking for more hard-news, basic reporting on these kinds of stories — not less. I am asking why some stories go nation and others are all but ignored, especially when it comes to seeking facts that can be observed in audio, video and even online print sources. You know, basic journalism.
Enjoy the podcast and, please, pass it along to others.
FIRST IMAGE: Uncredited photo of LaVell Edwards Stadium posted on Wikipedia page for this facility.
