Whose betrayal? Our latest Rebuilding Trust story sparks internal debate.

An interesting thing happened as some of us at the Monitor were discussing this week’s cover story. We had an argument. Not an "I'm going to go away and write terrible things about you on social media" kind of argument. But the good kind – a sharing of perspectives.

Our cover story is about Samuel Paty, the French secondary school teacher who showed two provocative, satirical pictures of the Prophet Muhammad in his class and was later beheaded. Two students, in particular, played a role in the events – one by spreading lies about Mr. Paty's class and the other by helping identify Mr. Paty to the man who would go on to murder him.

The story is a part of our Rebuilding Trust project. Writer Colette Davidson delves into the sense of betrayal felt by the teachers toward students at the school. They are trying to reestablish the trust so crucial not only to education but also to the broader community. But it remains a work in progress – persistent struggles amid sparks of hope.

Our internal debate centered on this question: Might some Muslim students have felt a sense of betrayal, too? The question is not about justifying such a heinous and inhuman act. There can be no justification. But what might trust have looked like from all sides?

Before showing his class the pictures, Mr. Paty thoughtfully told students they could look away or leave. His goal was to have this debate exactly: Was the satirical cartoon an effective mode of free speech or beyond the bounds of acceptable behavior? But he was clearly having the debate on French terms – as a secular discussion. Might Muslim students have felt he was forcing upon them a discussion that was enormously offensive and fundamentally at odds with their cherished values?

The debate could spool almost infinitely. But to me, the point wasn’t really the debate. Society seems to have forgotten that the result of a debate is often much less important than how it can sharpen minds and broaden understanding. When that happens, everyone wins.

And that is the triumph of Colette's story. In focusing on trust, she unleashes layers upon layers of meaning. None of the questions she raises has easy answers, but all are crucial to how societies both maintain their historic distinctions and create space for diverse perspectives. In that way, Colette’s story isn’t just about France, but about virtually every country on Earth as the world shrinks and cultures collide with greater frequency and force. Colette examines both the powerful motives of French secularism and how it has caused stress within Muslim communities.

Trust becomes the prism for this larger story. And interestingly, the article itself is a product of trust. Colette needed to gain the trust of people in the community who had, for so long, distrusted the media’s motives in seeking out such a sensational story. This week's cover story is a model for why we chose to launch Rebuilding Trust in the first place. With so much of the news today, when you begin to understand trust, you begin to understand much more than headlines and hot takes.