Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Tell the Truth campaign logo
NewsBusters.org logo

February 11, 2012
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • RSS
Home » Blogs » Warner Todd Huston's blog
  • Barbara Walters, Shameless Hypocrite: Hits Kennedy Mistress for Greed, Tells Her She Should Have Stayed Quiet
  • MRC's Bozell Scolds Media's Reluctance to Cover HHS Birth Control Mandate
  • Chris Matthews Excoriates: Rick Santorum Is a 'Theocrat' and Franklin Graham Is a 'Disgrace'
  • Time's Mark Halperin Concedes: GOP 'Would Be Creamed' by Media for Not Passing a Budget
  • CNN Reporters Call CPAC a ‘Conservative Petri Dish’
  • Chris Matthews Reacts to JFK Mistress: Kennedy a Hero Who 'Still Arouses the Country'
  • Covering Up JFK’s Roguish Behavior for 50 Years Not Long Enough for NBC’s Viewers
  • Bozell: It's 'Hilarious' CNN Suspended Roland Martin for Inoffensive Tweet; Maybe 'Lefty Loons at MSNBC' Can 'Scoop Him Up' Now

Minn. Star Trib: 'More People' Against Religious Christmas? Is 27% 'More'?

By Warner Todd Huston | December 27, 2007 | 03:30

Change font size:  A |  A

Here is the sort of ridiculousness that makes people distrust the media. The Minneapolis Star Tribune published a story that breathlessly proclaims that "More people say there should be less of a Christian emphasis placed on the holidays" making it appear that a Christian Christmas is falling into disfavor with the American people. Wow, how dire for Christianity! Yet when you look closer at the story, it turns out that only 27% of those responding to a poll are saying such a thing. It happens that 64% say there should be more focus on the birth of Jesus during Christmas. So, with such an overwhelming percentage in favor of the religious content of Christmas why is the headline focused on the anti-Christian sentiment? As a result of that negative focus, should someone simply read the headline, a false impression that contradicts the facts is quickly fostered.

But even as the headline and first few paragraphs of the story is focused on a negative reaction to the Christian content of Christmas, the actual stats show that the great preponderance of Americans are strongly in favor of the religious nature of the season. Still, the first two paragraphs of the story wallow in the negative.

While a majority of American adults still believe that Jesus should be the focus of the holiday season, a growing segment of the population disagrees.

A recent poll conducted by the Rasmussen Reports found that 27 percent of respondents said that there should be less of a Christian emphasis on the holidays. That's up 10 percentage points from a year ago when just 17 percent of adults felt that way.

But wait. These supposedly anti-Christian Christmas celebrants are no where near a majority.

Still, 64 percent of respondents said that the holiday season should focus more on the birth of Jesus. That's down one percentage point from 2006, when 65 percent felt that way, and eight percentage points from two years ago when 72 percent said Jesus should be the reason for the season.

Only the American media can see 64 percent approval as a reason to proclaim that "more people" are against something. Not only that, but those approving is only down 1 point from last year, a statistically meaningless move.

Additionally, the Star Tribune reports a 2 percent decline in people claiming they will attend church on Christmas Eve as "fewer Americans say they will attend" a church service.

Fewer Americans say they will attend a Christian church service on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day this year, with just 57 percent going to church this year, compared with 59 percent in 2006.

Yet, at the end of the story, we see the margin of error for this poll is 3 percentage points. So, in truth, the survey really shows a practically unchanging percentage of Christmas Eve church goers even as the Star Trib tries to make it seem like a downward trend.

In the final analysis, this story is unnecessarily focused on an anti-religious Christmas sentiment when the facts of the poll are overwhelmingly positive toward the religious aspect of the holiday. So, why did the Minneapolis Star Tribune feel it necessary to focus on the negative?

It seems pretty clear that their goal is to try and make this story as negative as possible quite despite the real statistics.

Don't you wonder why that is?

Share this
  • Anti-Religious Bias
  • Christianity
  • Media Bias Debate
  • Minneapolis Star Tribune
  • Journalistic Issues
  • Warner Todd Huston's blog
  • Login or register to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Donate to NewsBusters

Donate to NewsBusters Today!

This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead

User Shortcuts

Log in

  • My account
  • My buddylist
  • Log in to check messages
  • RSS feed
  • About NB
  • Contact us
  • Jobs
  • Advertise on NB

 

 

 

  • The cynical and self-contradictory Gospel of Obama (Krauthammer)
  • Video: Protesters at CPAC admit they're being paid to protest (Daily Caller)
  • Does the drug 'ella' cause abortions? (Weekly Standard)
  • Does income inequality cause global warming? (Power Line)
  • Jay Carney gets snippy about Super PACs (Verum Serum)
  • Where are the blacks for Roland Martin? (NRO/Media Blog)
  • Turkish Islamists turn church into mosque (Commentary)

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Recent comments

  • Dodd...
    1 min 52 sec ago
  • What he really means....
    4 min 20 sec ago
  • Accept it's not, now is it.
    7 min 17 sec ago
  • the Amish bus driver, is a lesbian
    7 min 50 sec ago
  • Let me be very succinct and just say: Can you expect anything
    11 min 32 sec ago
More >

Try a Sweater Vest, Mitt
more cartoons
  • Newt Gingrich's Full Address to CPAC
  • Newt Gingrich: As President I'll Repudiate 40% of Obama's Government on Inauguration Day
  • Ann Coulter's Full Address to CPAC
  • NYTimes Reporters Packing in 'Conservative' Labels at CPAC
  • Full Video of Rick Santorum at CPAC
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Lachlan Markay
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Editorial Associate
Aubrey Vaughan

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2012 NewsBusters. Terms of Use.