Interview: Andy Call

Even in first grade, Andy Call would get bored with class, open an encyclopedia and start reading. Being a reader as a child eventually led to a career as a sports writer for the Cleveland Indians and then beyond.

"It (journalism) was always in my blood," he said.

So was Christianity. He said his parents were saved about the time he was born, and he was raised in church. He accepted the Lord as his Savior at the age of nine at an evangelistic meeting.

In high school, he began writing sports stories for his school newspaper. Then one of his articles, about the football team going to state, was published in the local newspaper. He had always been a reader, and now writing had become a way to express himself.

After graduating from Pillsbury Baptist Bible College with a BS in English, he began covering the Cleveland Indians minor league team for the newspaper. Before long, he moved up to the major leagues, becoming a beat reporter for The Repository, covering the Cleveland Indians' major league baseball team. In 2008, he joined the Communications Department of Maranatha Baptist Bible College (now Maranatha Baptist University) as a writer/editor. Today Call is a media relations strategist at Wright State University in the Dayton, Ohio area.

While covering the Cleveland Indians, he said that his faith gave him opportunities he would not have had  otherwise. For instance, Call was asked by a Christian magazine, Sport Spectrum, to write about third baseman Travis Fryman. After the interview, Call and Fryman began talking about deeper, spiritual things. That's when Fryman told Call he was retiring. Call got the scoop on the story, because he and Fryman connected on a spiritual level.

When talking about sharing his faith in the newspaper, Call said, "I didn't feel I could shoehorn it into a story, but when I got the opportunity to speak a word for Christ, I took it."

In working for a secular publication, Call didn't concern himself with the political leanings of the newspaper. He said part of the reason the media is considered to be so liberal is that conservative people have abandoned it.

He said that journalists are faced with ethical issues every day. "My professional ethics reflect my faith," he said. "If readers can't trust me, that reflects poorly on my faith."

His biggest ethical issue, though, was his family life. After 18 years covering a major league team, at home and away, he saw how much time he was spending away from his family. So he gave up the road to work at Maranatha, where his family could be together.

"There's give and take in this business," he said. "You have to give up some things, but
when it affects your family..."

Having worked for both Christian and secular organizations, Call said there are positives and negatives to both types of journalism. Writing in the Christian realm, he said a person can feel good about the cause he or she is supporting. In the secular realm, he said a person can speak for Christ where it wouldn't happen otherwise.

"Every career move I've made, God has led in it," Call said. "It's however God leads."

The Power of THR3E

ABC...Three Blind Mice...Snap, Crackle, Pop...

Ever since childhood, we have been bombarded with the subliminal message of the power of the number 3. For some reason, the brain seems to grasp things easily in groups of three. Why? As one of my former editors put it, "Because four is too many, and two is not enough."

We don't have any clear reason why we like things in three's, but the mathemetician may say it's because the three-sided triangle is the most stable shape. The psychologist may say it's because the  human brain wants choices, but not so many choices as to confuse it. The Christian can speculate on it's connection with God -- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit -- or that Jesus was in the tomb for three days before rising from the dead.

Instead of spending time trying to figure out why people like the number three, we as journalists just need to use it in our communications. For instance, if we are going to list examples, list three. If there are several aspects of an issue, try to group them under three subheads.

The order of the three items makes a difference, as well -- especially the last item. Think of it as the punchline to a joke. While the first two go one direction in indicating what the list is, the third one needs to do something different. Perhaps it could be the most important item in the list:

1. Places in the news
2. Issues in the news
3. People in the news

Perhaps it could be the most recent event in the list:

1. The Civil War
2. World War I
3. World War II

Or it could go a completely different direction than the other items in the list:

1. He hates it when people question his integrity.
2. He hates it when people question his faith.
3. He hates it when people don't rinse out the coffee pot.

So whenever you find yourself needing to use examples in a story or list aspects of an issue, try to pare it down to three items or groups, and pay attention to the order in which you place them. While it won't make or break your story, it will give the story an added touch of professionalism.

Speaking Up: When and how it is appropriate

Sometimes in the course of covering the news, you as a Christian journalist will encounter a situation that is so wrong, you can't help but speak up. You most likely will be able to do this in a news story. But sometimes a local controversial issue will get so out of hand, that you find yourself needing to use your column to either calm the waters or remind parties of the "rules" of fair play.

I found myself in this situation once when I was the editor of a local newspaper. The local wildlife refuge had been contacting area property owners, letting them know that they could receive a tax break on any land they put into a government conservation program. The property owners saw this as a veiled threat to their property, and thus began a heated argument in the editorial section of my newspaper. I provided fair coverage, explaining each side of the issue, and then let them "duke it out" in letters to the editor.

The wildlife refuge director wrote one letter to the editor to explain that this was a voluntary program. The property owners formed an organization, and its members sent one letter to the editor after another lambasting the refuge and the federal government. The letters from the property owners got so heated, that I had to edit many of them for vulgarity and libel.

Finally, I'd had enough. I wrote a column one week to put a stop to it. I started by indicating that I had no opinion in the matter. My husband's family were property owners in a different part of the county, so I could truly say in the column that I understood the property owner group's point of view. I could also understand the refuge's point of view and that this was a completely voluntary program.

After planting myself firmly on neutral ground, I went on to say that there had been a lot of mud-slinging in the editorial pages of our paper recently, but the mud seemed to be flying in one direction. I put it right out there to the public that the letters to the editor from the property owners had to be edited for vulgarity and libel; while the refuge, other than the first letter, had remained silent no matter what the property owners had thrown at them in print.

I ended by saying that we will always welcome letters to the editor, but we need to "keep it above the belt."

I sent the paper to press, and then sat back and waited for the phone calls. The refuge director was the first to call.

"The column made my wife cry," he said. "You can't imagine the stress we've been under. Thank you so much."

The next call I received was from the director of the property owners' group. I expected yelling; what I got was a calm, controlled voice saying, "Could you please tell me which letters you are talking about that were a problem?"

I read some of the original versions to him over the phone, and we came to an agreement. He would talk to the group members and tell them to clean up their communication, and I would add to any letter not specifically from him a disclaimer that the letter does not represent the opinions of the group.

I wouldn't suggest doing something like this except as a last resort (I've only done it once in my career). But if you do elect to do a public reprimand, be sure to

1. Put yourself on neutral ground first,
2. Address only the part of the issue that is a problem, and
3. Let people know that you still welcome their opinions.