Was it biased BBC reporting or was it simply an unwise gaff?
I heard news of the tragedy unfolding as it was reported on, my favourite station, radio 4. But I was rather alarmed to hear the wording of the headline announcement. The perpetrator was described as a “fundamentalist Christian”.
As a Christian I would feel insulted to be called a fundamentalist. I am not sure what it actually means in a modern context but I know it would be meant as an insult and I would take it as such.
But why, in a brief headline announcement of few words should “fundamentalist Christian” have been included. the article then informed us that his deleted Facebook page described him as a body-builder and Free Mason. Neither of those details appeared in the headline.
I would have thought even Neo-Nazi might have been more fitting. But no, “Christian” seemed to be the distinguishing feature of this atrocity.
Later bulletins were a bit better. Perhaps someone got sane.