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

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
June 18, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • Obama ScandalWatch
  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Warner Todd Huston's blog
  • Martin Bashir, Who Compared Conservatives to Hitler, Now Decries Nazi Comparisons
  • Bob Herbert: There Would Be Tons of Outrage on Left if Bush-Cheney Pursued Obama’s Policies
  • Liberal College Students Sign Petition to Make Spying on Fox News Legal
  • ABC Hypes Obama Family's 'Beautiful' Vacation, Avoids Any Hint of Extravagance
  • Piers Morgan Defends the Nanny State: 'People Need Nannying'
  • Liberal Pundit Marc Lamont Hill Condemns Photo of Obama Holding ‘Military Style’ Watergun
  • New Liberal Study 'Lends Credence to Conservative Charges' of Bias; Dramatic Media Tilt Toward 'Gay Marriage'
  • Senate Amnesty Supporters Boast Marco Rubio ‘Neutralized’ Limbaugh, Fox News

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

By Warner Todd Huston | December 27, 2007 | 04:30

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?

  • Anti-Religious Bias
  • Christianity
  • Media Bias Debate
  • Minneapolis Star Tribune
  • Journalistic Issues
  • Warner Todd Huston's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop George Soros
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • Romney's revenge (Avik Roy @ NRO)
  • Relax, the Arizona voter registration ruling was narrowly drawn by Scalia (Hans von Spakovsky)
  • Snowden loses his moral authority with dangerous leaks (Rothman @ Mediaite)
  • Rapper Lil' Wayne stomps on American flag (Rare)
  • Apple releases information about data requests from NSA, other agencies (LA Times)
  • Five myths about privacy (Solove @ Washington Post)
  • Polls show Americans more libertarian on pot, gay marriage, guns (Barone)
  • Single men are opting out of society thanks to suffocating liberalism (Right Wing News)
  • What if Superman had to join a union? (Steven Crowder)
Chuck Norris's picture
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris Column: The Superman of Dads and Grads
Cal Thomas's picture
Cal Thomas
Cal Thomas Column: Broadcast Nets, Ailes Is What's Good for You
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: If the GOP Falls for 'Immigration Reform' Ruse, It Deserves to Die
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Let People Sell Their Organs to Sick, Needy Recipients
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Anthony Weiner's Underage Girl Problem
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

Audit the Man of Steel?!
more cartoons
  • O’Reilly: Obama Could Be Impeached If Evidence Shows Intel Agency Read Emails Without Warrant
  • Christie: Obama’s ‘Charm Offensive Should Have Started January 2009’; ‘Bit Late in Dating Game’
  • Howard Stern to Jimmy Fallon: ‘How You Got The Tonight Show I Don't Know. You Barely Beat Craig Ferguson’
  • Rand Paul: ‘I Want to Go From 5% of the African-American Vote to At Least 20-25%’
  • Chris Cuomo Claims He’s ‘Completely Divorced From Ideology’ While Talking Up ‘Advocacy Journalism’
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
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

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 © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use