Q: I work for a non-profit pro-life organization that sends out an e-newsletter. In the newsletter, we try to include a news article. I will be managing the newsletter going forward, and I wanted to ask about the morality of sharing news articles that could paint people in a negative light. For instance, there was a recent case of a young woman who was in danger of being starved to death like Terri Schiavo by her parents. I am thinking of sharing a follow-up article that talks about this issue while linking to and mentioning this case. And if there is an issue in the future, in the young woman’s defense, I might share about it. My concern is that this exposes the parents to public awareness of their sin. But it also brings awareness to people so that we can advocate against euthanasia. So, would it be more moral to share this incriminating story or not? It seems like a case of gossip/detraction or saving people’s lives. Would making an example of this case for the sake of awareness on the matter be an objectively valid reason to share such a story? Thank you. – M.B.

Answered by Fr. Edward McIlmail, LC A: It’s admirable that you raise this question. The idea of passing on negative news is a moral issue that could use more attention. As you say, the purpose of highlighting this case of the young woman would be an eye toward saving lives. That could justify some commentary, for the common good. It would be important, though, that the articles stick to the facts and not veer into judgmentalism. It would help that everyone in the pro-life group is reminded of the Christian ideals that (presumably) motivate them. These ideals can be communicated by the evenhanded tone of the articles. This is where it helps to have a multi-level editing process. Though that seems cumbersome, it can pay great dividends by guarding against any overly negative texts creeping into the e-newsletter. For related reading, see this post from Catholic commentator Francis Maier. I hope some of this helps. Count on my prayers.