I refer to the Malaysiakini article Religion reporting requires care, integrity.

The writer made a vitally important point about journalists. In her words, "It would be a relief if we could have journalists writing on religion with some amount of care but first and foremost though, I do hope they write with integrity".

On the outset I agree with her.

On second thought I became curious and latter critical of her statement. Journalists are those whose occupation or profession is reporting and editing news and issues for publication by the mass media.

They apply and perform their craft in conformity with some professional ethics – with their best knowledge, experience, talent and writing skills, and supported by dedication to duty and commitment to upholding truth.

As professionals, they always write in this manner or at least they are expected to, and with all subjects furthermore. It puzzles me why the writer has singled them out.

On this I deduce that she had Islam in mind. She referred to the National Fatwa Council and its latest declaration on yoga, for one, and on her contention that again, in her won words, "Abortion, homosexuality, euthanasia, death penalty …. that are framed and driven by religious beliefs and spiritual values" for another. These are institutions and issues Islam is closely linked with.

As for integrity, just what does this word mean? On the outset, it means adherence to moral principles, factual, honest, and objective. It also suggests the absence of value judgments, emotion, conjectures, malice, sensationalism, or politicisation.

She seems to be saying, "You journalists, bear this in mind: Islam is the one perfect religion. Should you wish to write about it, do so with care and integrity". What she did not say, but had most probably the following intention and meaning as well: "Do not therefore dilute, corrupt, sensationalise or politicise it".

It is entirely possible for me to be wrong, and presumptuous, and I stand corrected.

Nonetheless should I be right then what we are seeing is one stout adherent going all out to protect the sanctity dignity and honour of Islam. She is among the band of people known to think they have intellectual monopoly on truth, that (in this case) Islam is the one perfect and true religion.

I have no qualm over this claim, for every individual has his perception of truth especially religious truth. If the writer says Islam is the one and perfect and true religion, so be it.

What does matter is that this group of intellectual monopolists would claim that their version of truth is the one universal truth. Other forms of truth are declared as falsities. Adherents of other truths (or religions) are demonised. They are termed as kafir (infidels) and destined to the hottest corners of hell.

It also does matter that journalists are a group of humans who are as varied as humankind itself. There are the great ones, the merely good ones, the bad ones, the cheeky ones. Alright, some with high and others with low integrity. So when they write, they might tend to be carried away by their emotions, sentimentalities and even pranks and jokes.

But we as their readers should know this, and in turn should be able to sieve through their work: are their writings original and perseptive? Are they right or wrong? Are they ‘trying to be funny?

Are they good or bad journalists? Do they have high or low integrity? We determine their quality, and we too determine whether they are right or wrong. We judge the quality and even accuracy of their work.

The case of the fatwa on yoga, the issue that had started this mini-debate is a case in point. The National Fatwa Council had declared yoga as haram , or sinful and therefore forbidden for Muslims (in this country) to pursue.

Now, this declaration appears to be very contentious and controversial for many journalists, writers and even some members of royalty, who find it disconcerting to say the least.

It is therefore not surprising that some journalists have supported the ban, while others say you can still perform yoga as the religious authorities could really do very little in implementing this declaration. Some others have labelled it ridiculous. One thing is for sure: they write with ‘care and integrity,’ a phrase in this case synonymous with ‘with concern but without malicious intent’.

The writer too should be aware that this is one way modern civilisation communicates and exchanges ideas and work, and I do see this as the way it will continue to work well into the future.

What then is the root cause of all the fuss? I feel people like the writer have a huge sense of intellectual monopoly over religious truth, thinking that this is nothing else but religious and more pointedly, Islamic truth.

She and her peers and types are very sure of this and demonising journalists is one of their ways of showing it.