Admin

Admin

 

Verse of the Day

The Newsroom

Powered By
widgetmate.com 		Sponsored By
Digital Camera


Site Design By: SC Themes

Proud to be Americans



Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Blogroll

Newspaper Rack

Categories

Religion and Politics in the News, Part I

I’ve decided to start checking in on the national conversation about religion and politics—as given us in the national print dailies. Using Lexis-Nexis, I searched for articles that in some way refer to both religion and politics over the week of June 4 to the 10th (if you’re interested in my method, see note at the end of this posting).

Lexis-Nexis gave me 45 articles and what’s surprising is how coverage is greater in the blue states than in the red (or purple—see the University of Michigan’s maps of 2004 and 2006 electoral results). The New York Times(Requires free registration) had the most with seven articles, followed by the Los Angeles Times with four articles and an op-ed, and the Washington Post with four articles.

There’s just six in total from red states—the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, and the San Antonio-News, and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. And there are six from nation-wide dailies, three each for USA Today and the Christian Science Monitor.

Of course, if you’re one of those who believe the US media is one big liberal conspiracy, that’s there no real differences among newspapers, then none of this matters anyway (and you should just stop reading this–I mean it, right now–because I’m a cog in that conspiracy!).

The big story (fourteen) was the role of religion in the lives of presidential candidates. Seven covered the left wing Christian Sojourners event with Democratic presidential candidates. The CS Monitor gave it front-page coverage and the NY Times led the National section with the story on June 4th, and an opinion piece fronted its Metropolitan section on the 9th. The New York Daily News and Newsday buried the leads with short pieces, as did the Houston Chronicle.

So what’s in this story? Democratic front-runners Clinton, Edwards, and Obama, gave CNN interviewer Soledad O’Brian earnest accounts of the ways their faith in God has sustained them. Go here for the NY Times story. Only Peter Steinfels of the NY Times mentioned that CNN’s Paula Zahn interviewed the poor benchwarmers, Biden, Dodd, and Richardson, in a following segment.

While the frontrunners got to be all warm and fuzzy, these three Catholics faced hot-button questions about abortion, gay rights, and their take on the Pope. Evidently, Americans didn’t learn a dang thing from the Kennedy presidency about the distance between a US politician and the Vatican.

The frontrunners “Godtalk” left Steinfels unimpressed: “…too much about the complex relationship between faith and politics was left unarticulated. That did nothing to dispel the uncomfortable feeling that Democrats are merely aping the religious form of identity politics that Republicans have successfully practiced.”

So, if the Democrats don’t make religion a part of their public lives, they’re out-of-step. If they do, they’d better brandish some seminary-level training. I guess Democrats are not supposed to copy Bush’s successful practice of dropping traditional hymn titles and snippets of out-of-context scripture into their speeches.

Note: For CNN’s coverage of the O’Brian segment, go here. Zahn’s segment is here.

While Democrats were getting the chance to show off their previously private faiths, some Republican candidates complained about the opposite. They were getting too much attention to something they’d long been trumpeting.

It wasn’t as much a story though. The Chicago Sun Times gave them some cursory coverage deep inside. The USA Today mentioned on page 13 that at the May 3 debate, Huckabee, Brownback, and were the three to raise their hands at the question of who did not believe in evolution. Only the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette gave the debate front page coverage, no doubt because their native son, Mike Huckabee, Governor and former Baptist minister, went into some detail about his beliefs.

He later “bristled” over questions about evolution But Huckabee thinks questions about evolution “are designed ‘to create divisions’ among the candidates.” (See Alex Daniels, “Questions on faith irk Huckabee,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (June 7, 2007): Front Section.).

Wow. Can’t ask about something that 60% of Americans say they believe in? Something that’s created socio-legal explosions like the Dover case? Something that party guru, Karl Rove, has declared more than welcome to the GOP’s “big tent?” Hey! You reporters! Stop trying to help the public figure out what distinguishes one candidate from another!

The opinion pieces pointed to Giuliani. Newsday noted that Giuliani was “side-stepping” questions about his faith, but Steve Huntley of the Chicago Sun Times thought that this stance was working, and Michael Graham of the Boston Herald argued that Giuliani “got it right” in ignoring religious matters and focusing on national security.

So let me get this straight. A Catholic, a social liberal, out of New York City no less, should head up the GOP ticket? No one can say that Republicans can’t be dreamers.

Tomorrow, Part II: Muslims are from Mars, Christians are from Venus.

Method:
News Category: General News
New Source: Major Papers
Search Terms: Religion and Politics in Headline, Lead Paragraph(s), and Terms.
Dates: 6-4-07 to 6-10-07

I excluded non-US papers and threw out articles that the search engine confused with religious content (e.g., if someone said “my God” or used a religious term as a metaphor for a secular point).

Written by Ayschlay

University Update linked with Religion and Politics in the News, Part I

5 Responses to “Religion and Politics in the News, Part I”

  1. ~J~ Says:

    June 13th, 2007 at 12:12 am
    Visit ~J~

    Great post! You learned HTML very well! Now, let me absorb what you said and I’ll join in on any discussion.

  2. University Update Says:

    June 13th, 2007 at 2:06 am
    Visit University Update

    Religion and Politics in the News, Part I

  3. ~J~ Says:

    June 13th, 2007 at 4:55 am
    Visit ~J~

    This is a deep post, Ayschlay, as you probably know.

    I don’t watch much television so I can’t tell you for a fact the alphabet networks are slanted to the left. I can tell you if Fox News is doing a news program, such as Brit Hume’s at 6 pm it’s a news show, with about 20 minutes of commentary by liberals and conservatives at the end.

    What disturbs me most about the NYT is the fact they publish opinion pieces on the front pages and pass them off as news. Not always, but enough to make me get disgusted when I read them.

    The WaPo definitely leans left editorially as well as the LA Times. Those are pretty much the largest papers in the country.

    There are papers such as the Washington Times that leans right editorially, and the New York Post, if you can actually call that a newspaper and not a tabloid. Those are the ones I can think of right now, and it’s important to read them, although I resent editorial comments in what is supposed to be a “news” piece.

    I’m not one who agrees the MSM is always against the right.

    As to the religious part of the post: why do you think it’s the blue and purple states that are concentrating on religious issues this year more than the red states, which are comprised in large part of the Bible Belt?

    I want a president who acknowledges there is a God Who is more powerful than he or she, and that he or she depends on that God for wisdom and discernment.

    I don’t want to hear their personal testimony if they wish not to give it, but I want to know they are sincere in what they say when they say they believe in God. Since I believe there is One God and no other before or after, I want to know what god they are worshipping if they are asked.

    Is Obama really a Christian in beliefs or is it for political expediency since we know his father is Muslim and his mother was an atheist? We know he went to a Muslim school for a short period of time, but how much of what was taught during that time remained with him?

    I think this is important because we have radical Islamists who want to set up a new caliphate.

    All Christian faiths should concern themselves with those who are poor and sick. How much money do these rich candidates give to charities that would help these people, whether they are in the U.S. or in a foreign country?

    And, with their wealth, are they giving until it hurts? I bring up the story of the Widow’s mite. I have one of them. It’s very small; much smaller than a dime. Jesus commended her gift because she gave everything she had, whereas the rich people made a big scene of how much they gave and it was but a portion of the 10% God says is due Him.

    So, people such as these candidates can give $100,000 a year and not make a dent in their budgets or reach the 10% mark.

    These are questions I would like answered by any of our candidates. Not simple questions such as do you believe in God, or do you sin? Of course we all sin, and in times of distress we all believe in God. The question is do they walk the walk as well as talk the talk? They don’t have to wear it on their sleeves because we can tell by the way they act. And by their income tax returns. ;)

  4. Ayschlay Says:

    June 13th, 2007 at 7:12 am
    Visit Ayschlay

    I’m not an expert on journalism, and I’m not sure about the extent to which markets or readers drive what papers print, or whether editorial staffs (or their corporate masters)largely decide what goes in their news.

    We know that markets matter in some way. Newspaper reading has declined drastically since the arrival of TV fifty or so years ago, and even more with the advent of digital media (back in the day, J, your hands would be covered with smelly mimeograph ink as you churned out your newsletter, and mailed it off to family and friends, and left copies around the neighborhood).

    The Pew Foundation did this great study back in 2004 on this topic called “News Audiences Increasingly Politicized.” You can find it at http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=215.

    In 1998, 24% of Fox viewers identified as Republican, 36% as Democrat. In 2004 those figures were 41% and 29%. In 1998, 40% of Fox viewers identified as conservative, and 21% as liberal. In 2004 those figures were 50% and 13%.

    That’s a remarkable shift in viewership–but did that shift move Fox more to the right, or did Fox, in becoming more right-wing, draw a more Republican/conservative audience? Probably a bit of both, though it may be more of the latter.

    In 2001, Fairness in Accuracy and Reporting (FAIR) announced “The Most Biased Name in News: Fox News Channel’s Extraordinary Right-Wing Tilt” (at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=137). This report argues that Fox was on a right-wing mission from the get-go. Roger Ailes–the political strategist from the dark side that managed Bush, Sr.’s victory over Dukkakis–helped found Fox in 1996. Brit Hume has written for the American Spectator and the Weekly Standard, and many of his so-called bi- or nonpartisan guests are really conservatives, like Charles Krauthammer and Michael Barone.

    But I suspect that Fox filled a market hole–there was an audience out there hungry for news and commentary tilted to Republicans and conservatives. And there’s been an audience for pugnacious pundits like Limbaugh, Mulkin, Goldberg, and Coulter (matched on the left by Al Franken and Michael Moore).

  5. Big Mo Says:

    June 13th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
    Visit Big Mo

    Ayschlay - I’m a trained journalist with the sheepskin and field experience under my belt. The alphabet networks and major print organs (NYT, LAT, Time, Newsweek), plus CNN and NPR, are all tilted to the left. (As is FAIR. I don’t really trust their accuracy.)

    Fox does lean right — in comparison to the others. Its opinion is definitely to the right, and hence probably a big reason for the shift in audience, but its plain news coverage (when it’s not the stupid celeb or the news flavor of the month) is pretty even-handed.

    If you (generally speaking) rely on just one news outlet today, you’re missing half or more of the story.

    I can go on and on about what’s wrong with media today, but that;s just for starters.

    As for your piece itself, what bugs me about Democrats suddenly getting all religious is the hypocricy. We’re told that righties can’t mix religion and politics, but no one bats an eyelash when lefties do it. Witness how often lefties hold political rallies in churches.

    Righties talk about God and nowadays, they’re ridiculed. A lefty talks about God and it’s open and honest.

    The thing is, I welcome ANYONE of ANY political stripe talking about their faith. Just don’t say one side can do it but another side can’t (I know YOU didn’t say that), but believe me, I have a hard time hearing this faith stuff coming from Democrats — and believeing it — especially when my evangelical Christian faith has been spat on, trampled, ridiculed and shuned by much of the left for quite a long time.

    Sorry if this is rambling.