New Special Report: Apostles of Atheism

Photo of Kristen Fyfe.

In all the brouhaha last week over the incendiary comments made by Barack Obama's pastor the media seemed to forget to partake in their traditional Holy Week Christian-bashing excercise.  There were a few entries in the "Easter Hit Parade," like the Comedy Central show "Root of All Evil" which my boss, Brent Bozell, wrote about in a column recently, and an episode of "Law and Order" which featured another Christian-stones-someone storyline.

I suppose it's good news that there was less faith flagellation courtesy of the liberal media, and yet at the same time it's sad that I was expecting to find it at Easter time.  But the fact remains that Christmas and Easter are generally times when the media attacks on Christians are more pronounced.

For atheists it's a different story.

 Apostles of Atheism, a just-released special report from the Media Research Center's Culture and Media Institute, examines the 2007 coverage of atheism by several national news outlets, including all news programs on the three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, NBC), every 2007 issue of three leading weekly news magazines (Newsweek, Time, U.S. News and World Report), and four news programs aired on taxpayer-funded National Public Radio ("All Things Considered," "Morning Edition," "Weekend Edition," and "Talk of the Nation").  Analysis of 105 stories that either featured atheism or mentioned atheism in the context of reporting on culture, religion and politics found that the media did not scrutinize atheism the same way it scrutinizes Christianity.

 In 2007 three books by atheism's trinity, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, topped the best seller lists.  The national news media used this fact to shine the spotlight on atheism and atheists throughout the year.  And while there is nothing wrong with reporting a trend, the treatment given the godless and their beliefs was uncritical and often promotional.  In other words, unlike Christianity and Christians, atheism and atheists got a free ride from journalists.

An example from the study:

  • On a Sunday in September ABC's "Good Morning America Sunday" ran a feature on an atheist convention and used the event to proclaim that atheism was "unleashed," that "more and more" people were becoming atheists, and that the "stigma" of being an atheist "may be fading."

Key findings of the special report, Apostles of Atheism, show that 80 percent of the feature stories on atheism or atheists had a positive tone, like Time's December 3 write up on a Sunday school for atheists.  No feature stories were negative. Another finding was that journalists frequently introduced atheistic critiques into stories about Christianity but never into stories about other religious faiths. Further, journalists disproportionately favored atheists when it came to counterpoints.  In 71 percent of Christian themed stories, the national media studied in this report used an atheist counterpoint.  By contrast only 54 percent of atheism themed stories had a religious counterpoint.

Some more examples:

  • Newsweek used Mother Teresa basher and atheist Christopher Hitchens to write a review of the book "Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light," which detailed the revered nun's spiritual struggles.  He said the subtitle of the book was "slightly sickly," termed the handwritten notes contained in the book "scrawled" and "desperate," called Mother Teresa a "confused old lady" and wrote that her letters and what he presumes to be her loss of faith was "the inevitable result of a dogma that asks people to believe impossible things and then makes them feel abject and guilty when their innate reason rebels."
  • The reviewer for Hitchen's book "God is Not Great" was Newsweek reporter Jerry Adler who's bemused write up ended with this: "...he has been known to give the middle finger to audiences who disagree with him.  They get off lightly, compared to God."
  • "The Golden Compass," a movie based on the book by atheist author Philip Pullman, was released in December of 2007.  The Christian community was concerned about the movie because "The Golden Compass" is part of a trilogy, aimed at children, which ends with God being killed.  In the reporting on the movie the concerns of Christians were largely ignored or trivialized by the media outlets studied for this report. In fact only CBS's "Early Show" and NPR's "Morning Edition" gave the controversy serious attention, despite the fact that Pullman is on record saying his books are "about killing God."

Atheists argue that the existence of God cannot be proved and that it isn't necessary to believe in God to be moral.  Interestingly, according to State of the News Media, a report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, 91 percent of journalists working for national news organizations say it is not necessary to believe in God to be moral.  Is it a stretch to suggest that this convergence of beliefs is what led the press to give atheism a free ride in 2007?

 It appears that we may see more of the same in 2008.  As my colleague Tim Graham noted in his blog on March 12, atheists are still getting a better deal than God. 

 

 

 


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

why should anyone be surprised?

As a Christian I know that this is how society will end up, so I'm not surprised in the least. The persecution of Christians is right around the corner.

Despite Being Ultra-Conservative

Despite being an ultra conservative, I find religion to be a stupid idea. I don't believe in god, I believe in evolution. It would be nice if they put "separation of church and state" in the constitution.

roadgeek

Matt correctly pointed out that you seem to be missing the point of this piece. She's not complaining about people who are atheist: she's saying atheism is given favor in the media and that attacking Christianity is encouraged.

It doesn't have anything to do with the law.

If there is no GOD and we evolved from paramecium....

Where do the rights that are protected and enumerated in our Constitution come from? If there are no unalienable rights, as stated in the Declaration of Independence that come from our Creator, then what is the basis of our Republic and who is sovereign?

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

Deal with it

Well, they didn't put separation of church and state in the Constitution. As a matter of fact, they did the complete opposite. They made sure that the government ALLOWS for various religious observances, even by members of the government itself. The Constitution pretty much guarantees the people's right to create and practice their own particular brand of religious observance without prior government approval.

The majority of Americans, and the rest of the world for that matter, believe in a higher authority, a creator. Those beliefs can be freely stated in public (including on “public” property like government owned facilities) and the believers can assemble where they want, when they want, as long as they‘re not invading someone else‘s property. I suggest you deal with it.

I don't believe in Atheism.

That was meant to be humorous, but seriously...Are we talking about Atheism or ANTI-theism?  

It seems to me that what the MSM is favoring with their coverage is not a mere belief in the non-existence God and the Supernatural, but of activist anti-theism directed mainly toward Christianity and Judaism.

I believe the bias toward anti-theism or against JudeoChristianity is a tenet of the anti-theistic, humanistic religion of the MSM.

Of course, this is just a belief on my part...

This is not surprizing at all

There is a reason that the Book of Revelation says that at the "rapture", when all the faithful are snatch away before the tribulation, there will only be 144,000 of them. These are the faithful who refuse to capitulate and be marked by "the beast" and are persecuted because of their faith.

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

c5,

heres a preview

<wake up>SAVVVE The Whales N' Earth; conserve N' recycle !

IranianUranium<sleep>Infrastructure/repair?/ROFLMAO

 

What's in a name?

I think the press does say some disparaging things about atheists and their beliefs, they just list it under the heading of "Right-Wing Militants."

Answer to "what's in a name?"

Just ask BHO as he does not want anyone to use his middle name when referring to him!  That's what is in a name!

He has

a middle name??       ;>)

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V

Faith

Several years ago I watched a video production of a threepart PBS series with a panel of 8 people , 4 people with faith( not necessarily Christians) and four atheists,agnostics and skeptics. The topic was " Does God exist and is there an afterlife?" I do not remember the moderator but he seemed to lean slightly to amused agnostic. One of the interesting facets of the panel was they did not have a devout soul among the group. Plenty of intellectuals, as I am sure PBS would think that was fair; and people with a spiritual curiousity. It was all enlightening and thought provoking.

I watched the full series over three weeks hoping to find some new perspective or some answers to my questions. What I saw on the last episode was one of the atheist ( a middle aged man ) revealing the tortured agony of his his inner soul. He refused to believe and at one point he practically sobbed a statement to the moderator, " Its not fair that I should be condemned to hell for not believing in God ! " Wow , a liberal I thought. He believes HIS existence to be subject to absolutely no one , not even God. Poor lost and hopeless souls.

Atheists argue that the

Atheists argue that the existence of God cannot be proved and that it isn't necessary to believe in God to be moral.

  That's a really uninformed statement.  God is not an object.  God is not 'somewhere'.  I assume most persons on this site love at least one person.  Where is that love at?  Show me the actual 'love' and not a symbolic gesture.  To say that God doesn't exist because there is no proof then by that same logical analysis we can say that you 'love' no one because you are asking me to 'believe' something not provable.

This is a bit tangential,

This is a bit tangential, but, last night on the TV show Medium depicted a deranged, brutal kidnapper with a very visible cross on a chain around his neck.  Since there was no direct tie-in of religion to the episode, and I don't recall similar religious symbols casually and prominently displayed on the show in the past, I can only surmise that this was an 'insider' Easter egg bonus from the writers, producers and director of the show.

Another show that wears its atheistic colors on its sleeve is Eli Stone.  The main character 'possibly' has visions/hallucinations that are always prescient, though the show wants to keep everyone wondering if the visions are only from a brain aneurysm and incidental.  Despite aneurysmal hallucinations never accurately predicting events 100% the time in real life, the main character expresses his anti-theism "belief".  Then there is the crass insulting of Corporations, Republicans, Conservatives and anything Bush related.  The Liberal propaganda and preachiness borders on obsession and is a turn-off for me.

RRAM Tough! 

Atheists get a pass from

Atheists get a pass from the media because we are a minority. It is the same reason why it is considered more acceptable to pick on Christianity in this country than on other religions-- you're the majority, so you get the scrutiny. Same reason why it is socially acceptable to satirize christianity and not other religions. When you come down to it, humor at our own expense is funny, at another's expense is mean. Since christianity is part of our predominant culture, we make fun of ourselves by poking at the religion.

Enjoy the fact that your beliefs are culturally acceptable, in many circles mine are not. I listened to some talk radio jackass once tell me that atheists were worthless human beings who could not contribute anything positive to society. So what? I say man up and let the little things go :)

Oh, kinda like High School or something?

CP:  It is the same reason why it is considered more acceptable to pick on Christianity in this country than on other religions-- you're the majority, so you get the scrutiny.

So by that logic, if you lived in white South Africa during the late 80s/early 90s, you could make fun of blacks. . .rrrright?

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

exactly trake

And that's why everyone in the West is afraid to insult Islam.... 

Oh, but don't get me

Oh, but don't get me wrong candance, because I think atheism is so edgy and kewl, despite the fact that it relies on religion to exist. 

Well, to an atheist, his or her "faith" is an extremely complex system of beliefs. But, the central philosophy is little more than "the opposite of whatever religion says, 'cause religion's for idiots." Atheism is the ant farm of beliefs; there's no queen but the workers still follow, digging their own tunnels of meaning and getting extremely pissed off if you shake their tiny world.  -Ian Golding

Not like it landed Friedrich Nietzsche in the looney bin or anything. . .

"I praise, I do not reproach, (nihilism's) arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!" – Friedrich Nietzsche, Complete Works Vol. 13

Oh, but Cleverpig is indeed one of the strong, and is wholly without need of the crutch of religion.  Yet I doubt CP has ever come to that final crisis spoken of either, because that quote was make a long time ago, and I don't know of anyone that's mastered it yet.  Who knows, maybe CP is that one in a million that will show us how it's done.

As for me, someone mastered the crisis for me. I can prove Him empirically, but I cannot dictate to you the amount of proof you would require to satisfy you.

And that would still bring you no closer to salvation anyway. For salvation is an act of His breaking through your will and saving you; not the other way around.

All I can do is promise you that the day you cry out to Him with all your heart. . .that's when He'll be there. 

 -PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

you are so totally right!

Atheism is so totally original and unique!

You know, I managed to

You know, I managed to comment on this thread without insulting anyone's beliefs. I'd appreciate it if you guys could reply without insulting my lack thereof.

The merits of atheism are antirely tangential to the subject of this thread.

Please Clever. . .

How could I possibly insult your beliefs when you don't believe in anything to begin with?

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

Well, you could be

Well, you could be drippingly sarcastic and suggest that I am an atheist only because it is edgy and kewl and because I think I'm stronger than everyone else. All of which are condescending, none of which are true.

No, when I say culturally

No, when I say culturally predominant that can mean being in the majority, it can also mean being the most powerful group. Christianity in this country is both.

cg, what about in other wonderful countries 'round the world?

where Christians are in the minority?


http://www.prisoneralert.com/

If Jesus is no big deal, then why the punishment?

<wake up>SAVVVE The Whales N' Earth; conserve N' recycle !

IranianUranium<sleep>Infrastructure/repair?/ROFLMAO

 

Hi cleverpig,

Help me to understand your statement:


Atheists get a pass from the media because we are a minority.

Do you think this media "pass" for minorities should only pertain to atheists/religion or would it include other beliefs? Should majorities be singled out for media scrutiny?

I'm not saying it should be

I'm not saying it should be that way, I'm saying it is.

I think ideally any ideology or group should receive respectful scrutiny from the media, and that any conflicts between those groups should be analyzed fairly. However, the media isn't perfect and neither are any of us. I think that when we see people suffering discrimination or being disenfranchised in some way, we end up uncomfortable criticizing those groups even when the criticism is valid, because it seems unfair. Everybody ganging up on the little guy! Ideally we wouldn't have to worry about that, but I think the sentiment is well meaning and so it doesn't bother me that we have a slightly skewed standard in this respect.

Cleverpig, please clarify

Cleverpig, please clarify for me:


I'm not saying it should be that way, I'm saying it is.

Should it be that way or should it not be that way? Or can I gleen your answer from your thought below.

 

I think the sentiment is well meaning and so it doesn't bother me that we have a slightly skewed standard in this respect.

Since I believe the majority is well meaning, would it bother you if we "slightly skewed" the standard the other way around?

I don't think it should be.

I don't think it should be. Sorry, thought I made that clear. However, if we are going to err, I'd prefer we err on the side of being kinder to groups that are in the minority. So yeah, it would bother me slightly more if we skewed things towards the majority, since they already enjoy the inherent benefits of being a powerful majority.

I don't believe it should

I don't believe it should be skewed in any direction, but wouldn't a greater portion of humanity feel the kindness and benefits if in err, we skewed in the direction of the majority?

 

Sure, screw the minority!

Sure, screw the minority! There aren't really enough of them to matter, right?

??

??

cp, We believers ONLY know the ONE who is perfect, we sur ain't

We'd like to be like Him, we fail.

The media grinds us into the dirt for it. <imperfect> once again

 

I was thinking of Christian school girls in Indonesia..Shall I dig up some links, to muslem hobbies?

However the

headoffbody. skit, is well ok for kids.

Choose this day whom you are going to serve.

For me my life is a Relationship with Him a day by day adventure.

Never been a religion to (for) me ever.

 

<wake up>SAVVVE The Whales N' Earth; conserve N' recycle !

IranianUranium<sleep>Infrastructure/repair?/ROFLMAO

 

But will you get a pass from

But will you get a pass from God?

Eh

Eh

Stupid Atheists

Basically, the atheist’s end game is clear: a Hobbesian centralized world society in which life is cheap, mean, brutish, and short. When you have a culture in which a privileged elite demands the obeisance of a majority people who refuse to obey said elite, there is only one result. The culture war now years in progress in America is only a pale foreshadowing of the struggle to come. It is inevitable.  

Irony of all ironies, the elite (liberals, atheists, internationalists) are convinced that their ideas are "progressive," and they believe they have the power to steamroll the majority, as did the Romanoffs, Batista, etc., etc., etc.  

If they are correct in their assumption, we already see the leading indicators: races (Hispanic and Black) pitted against each other for material gain of the elite; an end of sovereignty (the end of borders, language, and culture—that foundation of all societies); hate-filled political dialogue; class envy and ridicule; and most important of all, the end of Objectivism--no truth, no religion—a morally relative world where evil is good (a debased society such as America’s--a de facto atheist society), and good is evil (witness the atheist's opinion of family, religious, and traditional values). Atheism and religious values cannot co-exist, so the atheists are efforting to kill religion. Once objective religious values are removed, societal values are as pliable as the outcome of a crooked horse race. 

The atheists have succeeded in Europe where religion is practically a non-factor and societal confidence is at an all-time low. A Soviet-style atheist gloom oppresses Europe—with their declining birth rates, etc.—and they barely stir as their continent is taken over by Muslims, which may be a good thing after all is said and done. As a matter of fact, the only two societies resisting worldwide atheism are Islamic and evangelical. That is why we are making war on one, and daily demeaning the other. 

Religion saved us from our Hobbesian existence once , but we have forgotten. We may have to learn the value of Objectivism once more, but the costs will be terrible—much, much worse than the 20th century.

Wow. I'm trying REALLY hard

Wow. I'm trying REALLY hard not to engage in this argument because it is so ridiculously off topic, but... damn.

Stupid Atheists

Basically, the atheist’s end game is clear: a Hobbesian centralized world society in which life is cheap, mean, brutish, and short. When you have a culture in which a privileged elite demands the obeisance of a majority people who refuse to obey said elite, there is only one result. The culture war now years in progress in America is only a pale foreshadowing of the struggle to come. It is inevitable.  

Irony of all ironies, the elite (liberals, atheists, internationalists) are convinced that their ideas are "progressive," and they believe they have the power to steamroll the majority, as did the Romanoffs, Batista, etc., etc., etc.  

If they are correct in their assumption, we already see the leading indicators: races (Hispanic and Black) pitted against each other for material gain of the elite; an end of sovereignty (the end of borders, language, and culture—that foundation of all societies); hate-filled political dialogue; class envy and ridicule; and most important of all, the end of Objectivism--no truth, no religion—a morally relative world where evil is good (a debased society such as America’s--a de facto atheist society), and good is evil (witness the atheist's opinion of family, religious, and traditional values). Atheism and religious values cannot co-exist, so the atheists are efforting to kill religion. Once objective religious values are removed, societal values are as pliable as the outcome of a crooked horse race. 

The atheists have succeeded in Europe where religion is practically a non-factor and societal confidence is at an all-time low. A Soviet-style atheist gloom oppresses Europe—with their declining birth rates, etc.—and they barely stir as their continent is taken over by Muslims, which may be a good thing after all is said and done. As a matter of fact, the only two societies resisting worldwide atheism are Islamic and evangelical. That is why we are making war on one, and daily demeaning the other. 

Religion saved us from our Hobbesian existence once , but we have forgotten. We may have to learn the value of Objectivism once more, but the costs will be terrible—much, much worse than the 20th century.

Kirk

Nicely said.

And I'm an atheist, but a very atypical one who hates the moral/ethical relativism of all the atheists around me. I very much hold religious (Christian, mostly, as I have an admitted suspicion of  Islam and don't know many) people and their traditional values in high esteem.

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change