Shanghai Scrap

Late last week I wrote a short post pointing out that Francesco Liello, the China-based correspondent for the Italian paper, La Gazetta dello Sport, had run a leg of the Olympic torch relay in Hubei at the beginning of June. For obvious reasons, the run didn’t garner much coverage in the foreign language-press. And what little it did garner, overlooked Liello’s primary claim to notoriety: he was the journalist responsible for the utterly false Olympic Bible ban story from last year (which became a minor international incident). In my post, I point out this fact, and surmise that Liello’s relay invitation was the result of someone either overlooking the Bible Ban story, or someone forgiving it (if the latter, a very good thing – as I noted in the post).

[Read my account - and debunking - of the story here.]

Anyway, yesterday Liello posted a response to my post in the comment section of this blog (it is comment three, found here). Of course, comments don’t garner the same level of attention as posts. So, in fairness to Liello, I am elevating his comment to a full post. You’ll find it after the jump, followed by my response. The two posts to which it refers are found here, and here, and I recommend reading them first.

Dear Adam,

I was very surprised on your first story about my article on the ban. First of all, before talking about an article you (and not just you, also all the people who commented it) should read it and also be able to read it in the language it was written (Italian) as I am able to read in several other languages (Eng, French, Spanish, Portuguese). But unfortunately so many people continue to comment on things they have never read. My “bible ban” story as you call it, goes far more deeper than what all you people think and it’s not about China banning the Bible but about how China deals with religion and the fear it has for something that can grow powerful (as religion is, and I cite Islam, Judaism, Buddhism) and could be a way to endanger the State. Yes, the title of my article (which I don’t do) was China bans the Bible but it has some sense, to get attention, since I live in a country that hosts the Vatican, and I guess it’s the centre of Catholic Church based on the Bible. Nevertheless before continuing on commenting what I do or why I was invited (was long before the Tibet issue) to run the torch leg ( I got confirmation in february and was invited for my “history” in sports and sports reporting and not for any different reason you’re mentioning).
I wouldn’t want, Adam, that suddenly someone would mistake your website as being Shanghai’s crap instead of Shanghai Scrap.
Best
Francesco Liello

Below, my response:

I understand that editors sometimes use sensationalist headlines to appeal to readers, and Italian editors might do that in Italy because, as Liello writes, it “hosts the Vatican, and I guess it’s the centre of Catholic Church based on the Bible.”

The problem is that Liello never repudiated the headline or the story. Instead, he went out of his way to defend it. On November 9, 2007, three weeksafter the original article ran in La Gazetta, Liello published a response – in La Gazetta – to accusations that the original story was inaccurate. In it, he mentions that his original article was based upon an information sheet (or article) distributed by BOCOG prohibiting materials that promote religious or political activities. Liello writes:

The article … referred to an official document presented by BOCOG (the Beijing Organizing Committee), in which it clearly states, in paragraph 7, that materials promoting religious or political activities are strictly prohibited. And the Bible is certainly religious material.

On the same day, November 9, 2007, Catholic News Agency published a letter that Liello wrote which includes this defense:

I believe that when there is a reference to religious activity, the Bible is fully included in this. And moreover under that same [rule] even a Cross on the chest could be regarded as forbidden material.

Pointedly, Liello’s CNA letter mentions that he never actually asked anyone at BOCOG whether the regulation in question restricts the Bible. He (or his paper’s headline writers) just assumed the inference, and then defended the story (or headline, if you will).

Even worse, in the same letter, he claimed that – in clarifying the issue – BOCOG then suspended the non-existent ban:

To the question of how the organizers understand “Promotional materials,” the person responsible for security said he was not in a position to respond, referring us to the Chinese legislation. Therefore, he did not clarify if the Bible could be regarded as promotional material. Since the term “display” was eliminated, obviously crosses or other exposed symbols are not forbidden any more.

So, all things considered, even if one accepts Liello’s claim that his original article wasn’t about the Bible ban, it’s hard to accept his claim that it was the fault of his editors, and he did nothing to advance the idea. Cearly, Liello went out of his way to defend the story.

Finally, the “Bible Ban” incident (if you will) happened in October and November 2007. Liello’s invitation to run the torch relay was made – as he writes – in February 2008. So, I stand by my original point: somebody either overlooked the fact that he wrote and defended the Bible Ban story, or they decided that it didn’t matter. The question of whether the torch relay spot was given to him due to his history as a sports reporter is a completely separate issue.

————-

A concluding personal note: my spoken Italian is rusty, but my reading skills (based upon 2.5 years of college Italian) are decent, especially when supplemented with a dictionary. In either case, I’ve read Liello “in the original” – and I’ve double-checked my understanding of his Bible Ban articles with friends who speak better Italian than me.

As for Shanghai Crap – I’ve written about that topic here.]