The same day the MRC's Culture and Media Institute (CMI) released its study [pdf available here] dealing with the media's preference for "secular progressive" values over those of those of orthodox religious faiths, evangelical magazine Christianity Today noticed that many newspapers are losing their religion [sections].
The CMI study concluded that:
Americans have clearly identified the media as primary culprits in the
nation’s moral decline. If the media continue to singularly promote
Progressive values and a secular worldview, while undermining Orthodox
faith and values, reversing America’s moral decline will be very
difficult.
In her March 7 article, writer Sarah Pulliam noticed a mixed bag on the media's handling of religion coverage. Apparently even as many newspapers end or severely restrict religion coverage in print, religion news-oriented newspaper blogs prove popular with readers:
In the past year, financial challenges have prompted cutbacks in religion coverage in newspapers.
The Dallas Morning News eliminated its religion section in early January. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution folded its Faith and Values section into the Living pages. The Wichita Eagle plans to cut its religion editor position, and other newspapers are removing their religion beats.
"In a time of flat revenues, we simply could not generate the advertising to break even on the section," said Bob Mong, editor of The Dallas Morning News. "I don't think any paper in the country tried harder than we did over the years."
Mong helped develop the religion section in 1994, but sees more potential now for online reporting in blogs and newsletters. The Dallas Morning News website has seen more page hits on its religion blog than it did for its religion section online, he said.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Please
March 7, 2007 - 15:42 ET by reelman46From this minute forward let us do at least one thing in unison... that is, stop using the flawed secular progessive (Bill O missed that and libs prefer the misleading "progressive") term... the correct term that describes the modern liberal is SECULAR SOCIALIST. Never ever use anything else.... its how they vote, its what they do... and socialism is not progessive.
Once you smell that glove.. move on to calling their leaders neosocs to offset neocons... they are socialists so use neosocs. Get with the program... get on offense and stay there.
Wow, they really know what to
March 7, 2007 - 15:51 ET by bigtimerWow, they really know what to cut from their papers don't they, either they are going to lose more readers, or those readers that look forward to the religion section are not going to be buying their paper anymore...
Hmmm...Maybe they didn't in the first place.
By the way reelman, I love your suggestions.
Article says NYT will be enha
March 7, 2007 - 16:01 ET by JDWArticle says NYT will be enhancing religion coverage to benefit circulation.
Also, what effect will this ommission have on the slander of politicians who are religious?
JDW
Wounded skier, beware of mistakes.
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
A couple points
March 7, 2007 - 16:05 ET by KC MulvilleYou don't go to a newspaper to discover the news about religion. That's what church is for.
You don't find the Good New
March 7, 2007 - 16:22 ET by Ken ShepherdYou don't find the Good News in a newspaper, true. But certainly there are a lot of news items pertaining to American churches and church denominations worthy of coverage, both the positive and the scandalous.
So why not do more reporting on church-centered charities and mission work? Why not more in-depth reporting on the theological and political disputes within American denominations about gay marriage, ordination of open and practicing homosexuals, etc., etc.?
Ken, because the "lordsh
March 7, 2007 - 16:36 ET by tracheostomyKen, because the "lordship salvation" controversy is over most Christian's heads.
Are you sure you want to cover all the disputes? Because there's quite a few out there that evangelicals are sweeping under the rug, in favor of lower hanging fruit. . .such as gay marriage.
-PJ
"I'm not a theologist. I'm not an archaeologist. I'm a documentary filmmaker." -James Cameron
This is where online conten
March 7, 2007 - 16:51 ET by Ken ShepherdThis is where online content can expand on what print does at the most basic level. The blogs are perhaps evidence that there is an audience for this stuff that will soak it up. There are days I dork out to theological blogs and get zilch done at wor-- oops, do I really want to type that.
But seriously, you know what I mean.
So no, I don't expect papers to have a five-part series hashing out Rev. Smith from First Presbyterian with Rev. Jones of First Wesleyan on Calvin vs. Arminius. But I think the reader is smarter than newspapers give them credit for and that reporters have the capacity to actually grasp religion decently enough to cover it without looking like a doofus.
Church reporting
March 7, 2007 - 17:13 ET by KC MulvilleYes, but I'm not talking about the Good News, either. The churches should be telling parishioners/congregations what they're up to, as well as controversies and debates within the church. That's just normal communication.
And as far as the controversies, these should be discussed openly also. I'm a Catholic, and I'm under no misapprehension that Catholic policy is going to be decided by popular vote. But it's no insult to the bishop's authority when we explain the issues that the bishop is deciding on. In fact, a well-informed congregation is essential if the bishop's decisions are to be carried out faithfully.
The local newspaper isn't equipped to do that. They can only explain these issues in general, but not part of every denomination's dogma.
I see what you're saying, b
March 7, 2007 - 18:48 ET by Ken ShepherdI see what you're saying, but I think in a country with millions of worshipers from diverse religious backgrounds, you're being remiss as a news agency if you don't pay some measure of attention to religion/faith/values as a news beat.
Certainly major metropolitan papers can put at least one reporter on that beat. One week he could be tracking a story about pilfered money from a local parish, the next he can write up the 25th anniversary of some local priest's ordination, etc., etc.
In any given city on any given week there are numerous stories of general interest to a general news audience that has a religious angle to it.
If it wasn't for the shoppi
March 7, 2007 - 16:24 ET by Tim the EnchanterIf it wasn't for the shopping ads and coupons, most of these guys would have already gone under. Yep-great business plan.
I don't blame the papers for
March 7, 2007 - 16:30 ET by tracheostomyI don't blame the papers for removing their religion sections.
My local rag in particular pays too much attention to liberal theologians and then calls it "deep".
I would also imagine they face alot of pressure from all the competing sects and denominations vying for a bit of print.
-PJ
"I'm not a theologist. I'm not an archaeologist. I'm a documentary filmmaker." -James Cameron
That is a good point, a lot
March 7, 2007 - 16:39 ET by Ken ShepherdThat is a good point, a lot of times religion stories become puff pieces for liberal theology or frou frou churches.
My hometown newspaper, The Maryland Gazette, however, is a different story. No large religion section per se, but very decent coverage on the whole of local churches and community events. And every Christmas they have a tradition where they print on Christmas Eve a front page with "news accounts" written from Bethlehem. You know, what if Bethlehem had a daily paper and what if reporters interviewed the principals involved, talked to the shepherds, etc., etc.
It's kinda neat. Of course, it's a local paper, not a metro major, but still.
Well Ken it just goes to sh
March 7, 2007 - 17:01 ET by radiofitz34Well Ken it just goes to show that newspapers are losing lots of subscribers. I reckon most people get their news from the net. I would also include cable news, however between Fox, CNN and MSNBC, they lose lots of folks when they do stuff like Anna Nicole and the like.
I'd say the trend away from a "religious" section was predictable. I'm sure it was a money issue even though for a while they kept it going out of their "kindheartedness" and so the post-Christian era continues. But we know that God will never be dead.
Clueless coverage
March 7, 2007 - 18:34 ET by m1xramtracheostomy,
I don't read newspapers but I do watch a lot of TV. There are great documentaries on the TLC and History channels but when they get to religion they seem absolutely clueless. So clueless in fact I eventually have to change the channel because of the bogusness of the material.
It's like they don't understand the most simplest of concepts. Take the Davinci Code for example. Here's a book that starts with something like "This is fiction." Where do you go with that? A documentary and a work of fiction seem to be mutually exclusive. What's to document?
I watched a PBS thing about the Paul Peter confrontation. The "theologians" PBS dug up thought it was a power struggle in the Church. They didn't even mention the "brother correcting his brother" concept. Were these secular "theologians"?
Power struggle, what were they talking about? We have no power, it is Christ's power not ours. We are servants, not people climbing a corporate ladder.
The one thing we need to keep in mind is that it is very difficult for people to speak on topics they don't fundamentally understand.
History Channel
March 7, 2007 - 18:51 ET by RJThose History Channel "documentaries" have to be watched with a large grain of salt. Their historical "facts" often carry as much a liberal bias as Wikipedia. For example, a recent program about the Mexican American War flat out misrepresented several important facts in order to make the U.S. look bad.
And this is where newspaper
March 7, 2007 - 18:51 ET by Ken ShepherdAnd this is where newspapers and other news agencies can look to seminaries for religion reporters. Perhaps from the pool of alumni of said seminaries or seeking freelance work from seminaries with some measure of journalistic experience.
Fox News regularly turns to a Catholic priest at the Vatican for stories about the Roman Catholic Church. It seems to me that's a good rubric to work from.
Guys, don't freak out or anyt
March 7, 2007 - 23:36 ET by tracheostomyGuys, don't freak out or anything, but this is where I give Larry King some credit.
Whenever he discusses religion on his show, he has a whole panel--covering just about the entire spectrum of "Christianity." I was especially impressed when he had John MacArthur on a couple of times (found it on YouTube).
-PJ
"I'm not a theologist. I'm not an archaeologist. I'm a documentary filmmaker." -James Cameron
You're on to something ther
March 8, 2007 - 00:25 ET by Ken ShepherdYou're on to something there. MacArthur is a gifted and able speaker and a good minister of the Word. I don't always agree with him, but I do appreciate that King has had him on his program.