Reuters blog archive
A reader recently objected to our use of the phrase "the Prophet Mohammad" in news stories, saying that he as a Christian did not consider Mohammad a prophet and many other non-Muslims presumably didn't either, therefore we should not write about him as if everyone agreed he was one. The reader wrote:
I’ve just noticed recently that Reuters is following in the footsteps of AP and AFP in designating the Islamic prophet Mohammad as “The Prophet Mohammad”. I as a Christian don’t consider him my prophet, and neither do, I’m sure, Jews, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. Why then have all the mainstream news outlets decided to treat us all as if we are Muslims? Rightly, he should be described as “the Islamic prophet Muhammad” rather than “The Prophet Muhammad”.
Robert Basler answered on his reader feedback blog Good, Bad and Ugly. Normally, we simply crosspost religion-related items from other Reuters blogs (such as Front Row Washington or Pakistan: Now or Never?), but I'm not sure all readers know that Good, Bad and Ugly (GBU) is the blog where we answer readers' criticisms. So now that that's clear, here's what the GBU editor posted in "A non-prophet organisation?":
Reuters uses a wide variety of official and traditional titles and honorifics without endorsing them.
Swedish artist Lars Vilks, who angered Muslims by portraying the Prophet Mohammad as a dog, has suffered a failed arson attack on his house, but was not home when it happened.
Vilks told Reuters on Saturday that people smashed windows at his house in the small town of Nynashamnsvage in southwest Sweden and tried to light petrol that they threw inside. But the attack resulted only in small damage in the kitchen and on the facade.