Thoughts on Detroit-Focused Journalism (or "A Response to the Wall Street Journal")

Last week, the Wall Street Journal published an article covering new evangelical churches in the city of Detroit. "In Detroit, Some See Grounds for Church Planting" at first served to encourage me as much for its potential as its actual reach. In the end, however, I was discouraged by its lack of focus and how easily it reverted to the the national stereotypes of Detroit.

For starters, the article takes the subtitle "New Evangelical Congregations Take Root in Depressed Areas, but City's Deep Burdens Sometimes Hinder Mission" and reflects that in two churches. Obviously brevity and focus must come into play, and some level of editing is out of the hands of the journalist, but I wonder how restricted the results will be when such a limited perspective is pursued. It was disappointing that the article was limited to evangelical congregations, when a lot of good work is being done in other parts of the Christian tradition as well.  

But they are never far from the realities of Detroit. Mr. Russ once had his car stolen, only to recover it himself in a confrontation with thieves. Another Mack Ave. pastor, Leon Stevenson, and his wife were robbed at gunpoint in front of their home last fall. (emphasis mine)

I would love to ask the journalist what he means by this. Is he suggesting that auto theft, confrontations with thieves, and being robbed at gunpoint are the "realities" of Detroit? That seems like a stretch. Sure, some of us have had vehicles stolen, but how many of us have been robbed at gunpoint? For that matter, how many other church people in other cities have been robbed at gunpoint and thus reflect the realities of their own cities? That seems like a cheap generalization that could very easily be experienced by a minimal percentage of church workers in Detroit. Who knows? It seems the journalist does not.

Mack Ave.'s founders say they sense a lingering skepticism toward outsiders -- particularly whites -- who settle in the city. Indeed, a few of the founding members of the church ultimately left, deeming the divide too wide.

There are two problems with this perspective. For starters, a limited sample size will suggest that the large majority of young churches in greater Detroit are being started by neighborhood newcomers, which doesn't seem to be true in my experience. But again, because so few church people were included in this article, it is portrayed as the normative experience. Secondly, fear-of-newcomers is a problem that is not exclusive to Detroit, or Michigan, or urban settings. This sense of "lingering skepticism" is often part of any established community, and while it is not my place to critique the persons interviewed for the story, I do take issue with the summation of the article.

Mr. Stec, who is white, had racial epithets directed at him on the street, and says he ultimately felt unwelcome and unsafe. After deciding he didn't feel comfortable relocating his wife here, he took a job at a church outside Des Moines, Iowa, instead. "I wouldn't necessarily discourage anyone" from going to Detroit," says Mr. Stec. "But I would certainly preface it with the realization that it's going to be difficult."

Moving is difficult. Starting something new is difficult. Again, we're left with this contention that this is somehow "different" or "worse" in Detroit, something that will provoke the reader to perpetuate the stereotypes and perceptions of the city in their general conscience.

Final Thoughts

This is intended to be a constructive critique of the article and not a derision of the work of this journalist and publication. If they are considering a piece about Detroit in the future, I would hope they would consider the following suggestions:

• Keep It in Context.
  • If something is not exclusive to Detroit, please don't portray it as such. Our city and region face plenty of difficulties, and we do not need help damaging our image globally with falsely unique problems.
• Let History Be History.
  • Yes, Detroit has a checkered history when it comes to economy, religion and race. Some of that is not exclusive to Detroit (see "Keep it in Context" above), and while negative history can loom larger than an elephant, there is a certain point where history must become exactly that. Yes, some people are racist, but I have experienced very little of it living in the city of Detroit this year. Yes, we had riots in 1967, but that was two generations ago, and the constant reference to it in contemporary journalism makes me wonder why so many continue to push that as the "Detroit identity."
• Get the Bigger Picture
  • Of those that I have met, a large majority of church workers in Detroit work bi-vocationally and are not blessed/burdened with the reliance on outside-of-the-city support. Mack Ave. is the first church I have encountered in Detroit that is planting with such a large and costly staff. The challenges reflected by Mack Ave. do not necessarily reflect the challenges facing each new church work in Detroit, and I would contend that they are creating a whole new set of challenges because of the staff choices they have made. The idea that Mack Ave. is typical to the Detroit context is problematic at best.
• Don't Assume The Ending of the Story
  • Each time I read an article about Detroit, it always seems that the summation is prewritten. "Everything is tough, nothing has changed in 40 years, and there is probably no hope for this place." The closing paragraph leaves the reader with a negative perspective based on one ex-Detroiter's lasting thought, one which again contradicts my "Keep it in Context" principle above.