pc28����

At the Star we also learned a tough, but very important lesson this week about covering this story: that news surrounding the process isn’t always reliable — even when it comes from seemingly reliable sources.

In our print and online editions last Sunday, we published a 1,521-word article about how the pope is chosen and who the front runners were.

A section of the piece referenced Cardinal Pietro Parolin, a former Vatican secretary of state and long-time diplomat, widely considered one of the top contenders. We reported that there was a reminder of the stakes involved in picking a new pope, when Parolin’s blood pressure “reportedly spiked this week” sending Vatican doctors scrambling to Parolin’s aid.

Monday morning, I popped open an email from reader Alan, a pc28����resident, who told us to “check your facts” regarding the point about Parolin’s health and subsequent medical attention.

“Matteo Bruni, director of the Holy See press office, reported that this did not happen,” Alan stated — the Holy See being the governing body for the Catholic Church that includes the pope and advisers.

I reached out to veteran Star journalist Allan Woods, the author of the article. I also got in touch with the editors who handled the story.

As it turns out, we didn’t pick up the statement last Friday from the Vatican that shot down the report on Parolin in time to revise the article. We weren’t alone, however, in printing the erroneous detail.

We ran a correction early this week quoting the Vatican spokesperson. Other media outlets in other countries published corrections too.

As public editor, getting into the details of what went wrong here was very instructive for me.

Woods, a Paris-based veteran staff reporter, who covers global and national affairs, told me he first saw a post about Parolin’s alleged health episode on the platform X. It came May 1 from a rather good source — Diane Montagna, the Rome correspondent for the Catholic Herald, a well-known and respected Roman Catholic magazine.

According to multiple sources … an “alert” was triggered in the Vatican concerning the health of Parolin, one of the leading papal contenders, Montagna said in her post.

She cited an elevated blood pressure issue and that a medical team assisted Parolin for an hour. She attributed the report to an Italian journalist from the daily Rome publication Il Tempo.

After the Vatican clarified things, questions began being asked about who initially launched the false report.

The ran an , reporting that there was finger pointing regarding who was responsible.

“At the moment, the American Catholic site and several Italian news agencies seem to be in a contest to see who can off-load responsibility for the rumour on the other,” the Catholic Herald’s website stated.

The publication later added a note of intrigue — that the “hunt seemed to be on to identify who was responsible for a report now seen as a fairly naked attempt to sabotage Parolin’s chances.”

I reached out to a local expert on the Catholic Church, Mark McGowan, a professor of history at the University of Toronto’s St. Michael’s College, who told me there may indeed have been some orchestrated mischief behind the erroneous account of Parolin’s health.

“(Parolin) has a progressive side to him, so those who would like to undermine that candidacy could easily start spreading rumours,” McGowan told me in a telephone interview.

McGowan added that the Italian media had been blamed by some, but “things in a way smell bad” when is mentioned.

“You’ve probably heard of them. They are kind of a cultural warrior, conservative Catholic, online site, that certainly wouldn’t like a progressive pope,” McGowan said.

As public editor I did reach out to in the U.S. to get their side of what happened. In an email to me Thursday, the organization said they didn’t invent the story, they only reported what the Italian press reported, then retracted the report when the Vatican denied it.

Yet some Italian media outlets have cited as the originator.

So, we’re left with a bit of a whodunit.

The lessons? McGowan said anytime an extraordinary piece of information comes out of Rome pertaining to the Vatican “you really have to weigh it with great care.”

Woods, the author of the Star article, had a similar take in the aftermath.

He said the world’s media turn necessarily to the Vatican correspondents and the specialized Catholic publications at times such as this and this can lead to an “absence of independent expertise.”

This gap in information and access and resulting “vulnerability” is compounded by the fact that the church conducts so much of its business (like the pre-conclave meetings) behind closed doors, Woods told me.

This isn’t an excuse for retransmitting information that the Vatican said was incorrect — but is important context, nevertheless, Woods added.

From my vantage point as public editor, I would call this a cautionary episode for any journalists covering the Vatican.