Newsrooms in the United States increasingly refer to Islam’s chief religious figure, Muhammad, as “the Prophet,” when reporting on major events involving the Muslim faith.
In January, for example, after terrorists attacked the Paris offices of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo for repeatedly mocking Islam and Muhammad, both the New York Times and the Associated Press were careful to refer to the founder of Islam as “the Prophet,” while the Washington Post referred to him as “the prophet.”
In May, multiple reports on two would-be terrorists who launched a failed attack in May on a controversial “Draw Muhammad” event in Garland, Texas, carefully prefaced all references to Muhammad with “the Prophet.”
Why, exactly, do so many newsrooms in the United States often refer to Islam’s central figure as “the Prophet”?
“Our style does not require use of ‘Prophet’ as a title or description for Muhammad, and the name often appears in The Times without it,” the New York Times’ standards editor, Phil Corbett, told the Washington Examiner’s media desk this week.
He referred the Examiner to a January article, titled “Charlie Hebdo’s Defiant Muhammad Cover Fuels Debate on Free Speech,” wherein the title of “Prophet” is missing but “the bearded prophet” stands in as identification of the religious figure. In a caption to a picture included in the story, the Times again titles Muhammad as “the Prophet.”
The paper does, “frequently use the phrase,” Corbett said, adding there are two likely reasons for this.
“First, it is the normal reference used by hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world, including many Times readers. And second, it’s a very easy way to immediately make the reference clear, since ‘Muhammad’ by itself is one of the most common given names in the world,” he said.
“A close parallel, I think, would be a reference to ‘St. Paul’ or ‘St. Peter’ — both common in The Times — which is clear and accurate, without making any theological assertion on our part. Another comparable case might be ‘the Virgin Mary,’ also a common phrase in The Times,” he said, adding, “Of course, ‘Christ’ itself — ‘the Anointed’ — is actually a title, not a name, in reference to Jesus Christ, though probably few readers think of it that way.”
The Associated Press’ Paul Colford told the Examiner that they don’t have any hard rule dictating references to Muhammad.
“No rule says ‘prophet’ must always be used with Muhammad. Some of our writers may think that ‘Muhammad’ just by itself could be unclear to some readers, given how common a name it is. Or they may think that not everyone understands Muhammad’s role in Islam as a prophet. Adding ‘Prophet’ helps clarify,” he said.
He added that, “Abraham, Elijah and Isaiah etc. also are commonly spoken of as prophets by many millions of people so that our entry in the Stylebook reflects common use.”
The AP stylebook, which has undergone significant changes regarding the use of terms like “Islamist” and “terrorist” due to pushback in 2012 from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has specific guidelines regarding how reporters should refer to Muhammad
“The chief prophet and central figure of the Islamic religion, the ‘Prophet Muhammad’,” the updated stylebook states. “Use other spellings only if preferred by a specific person for his own name or in a title or the name of an organization. Capitalize Prophet before a name.”
The press’ habit of referring to Muhammad by a title conferred on him by people of the Islamic faith has raised questions on the right, with some wondering whether the use of “the Prophet Muhammad” in media reports is tantamount to journalists referring to Jesus Christ as “Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.”
“I’m sure many American journalists are Christians, but when reporting a story that involved Jesus Christ it wouldn’t be proper to refer to him as ‘Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,’ or ‘Jesus Christ, the Messiah,'” conservative talk radio host Larry O’Connor said in an article written for the Federalist. “Why on earth do the news media continue to proclaim Muhammad as a prophet? Isn’t ‘prophet,’ in this context, a subjective modifier?”
In January for National Review, Ian Tuttle noted, “Mohammed would not seem to be such an obscure figure that he requires an identifying adjective. (‘Oh, that Mohammed!’) Rather, there seems to be an implicit, unique measure of respect accorded to the religious leader of Islam that is passé when it comes to the carpenter from Nazareth.”
For the Grey Lady, use of “the Prophet” is no deeper than an attempt to be respectful to readers.
“We try as much as possible to respect the terms and language used by religious groups. Muslims routinely refer to Muhammad as ‘the Prophet Muhammad,’ but I’m not aware of any Christian denominations that use ‘the Prophet Jesus,'” Corbett said in 2012.
The Washington Post did not respond to the Examiner’s multiple requests for comment, which included over the course of several days multiple emails and phone calls and a visit Tuesday to the news group’s Washington, D.C., offices.
