Is the Media Motivated by Ideology or Greed?

On a final thought about the media:

It is said that to manipulate people there is no need to lie; you only need to withhold certain facts.

And the truth is that we are manipulated everday. Bush (up until 6 months ago) is a great example.

Interesting argument; however, in many cases the way in which the media presents information creates ignorance/bias.

While it is not the job of the media to educate the public, they could provide some context in their "stories." Take the Catholic Church (to which I belong), yes there was abuse and there was a couple of instances where bishops covered up instead of doing right thing. That being said, the media presents this soley as a Catholic problem! In another discussion on this forum, one of the panelists provided some figures 4% of priest have been charged with abuse -- yet the important context that they leave out is that 8% of protestant clery are charged and 11% of rabbis! This is not to mention the very high rate in public schools. The media just focuses on one group and this provides a bias!

As for spirituality, you like to claim that spirituality and organized religion are mutually exclusive. Where do you find such evidence??

Personally, I went through a spiritual process on my own and then joined a community of faith which happens to be Catholic. Despite what you like to think, it is not a cult and there is no brainwashing! The community enhances the experience - and religion/spirituality are supposed to be human experiences.

speed...

O.K. - thanks for dropping Gordy. Now...

Let's look at the pedophelia issue. It would seem that by the act of covering up for it's priests, the Catholic church is, at least in a de facto manner, instituitionalizing the behavior. I suspect this is not a new issue, but has been something that has been present in the church for perhaps literally hundreds of years. It has only been since the media has exposed this behavior that the Church has seen fit to do something about it. Prior to that, the only response was to move the offender to another diocese.

As for the fool's guide comment. Each person must ultimately find their own spirituality. If someone must rely on an external source to delve into themselves, how can they find what they really are and believe? A poor choice of wording, perhaps but the point remains. External doctrine seems to be antiethical to self discovery. I would argue that without self discovery, one is only a parrot.

Cuidado! Reading between the lines tends to conflate the reader and the writer, often to the benefit of neither.

Yes, the media sensationalizes events, especially when it involves high profile individuals. At the same time, many of these individuals attained their position by condemning the very things they practice. It's that fall of the mighty that draws the eyeballs that advertisers seek. The janitor and the third floor maid are far less interesting.

Our culture´s preoccupation with celebrity and sensation is not the sign of much (or any) thought. Still, without the media providing at least information as to the existence of these conflicts, how are people to grow? Surely, ignorance is not bliss.

Speed 123...

I'll take my chances getting my news from all sorts of places and come to my own conclusions after reading a multitude of coverage.

I prefer NOT to take my belief system based on a centuries-old dogma that demonstrates repeatedly that it exists for no other reason than the same one for which you deride the media-making money.
At least the media doesn't try to hide the fact that they're in business.

Your religion(s) - and NOT just the catholic church, but ALL of them - are there to make a buck as well. In my view, the media are a lot more honest about than those you proclaim to be above all that.

sorry - that last one was me.

Unknown - it is called reading between the lines. Ignorance and bigotry like to hide in sterotypes:

OK - maybe I should have left Gordy out of it, however:

Ken: granddaddy of them all-the Catholic Church with their institutionalized pedophilia.

Robert: Religion is merely a fools guide to spirituality.

These are all ignorant and simple statements, no two ways around it!

Also, there is a difference in making people aware of a situation or controversy and exploiting/sensationalizing such events for profit. The media (along with this administration) loves to simplifiy reality and scare the general public because it makes the best stories/business/war.

Read Neil Postman "Amusing ourselves to Death" before you generalize religion or class or ethnicity using the "information" you get from the news"

speed123...

The 3 posts you cited never said "they are all pedophiles." That comes from you, not them.

Robert said "Each and every person is aware of their level of spirituality and how it affects their personal reality. Religion is a mechanism that eliminates the need for personal responsibility when it involves actions and justification." This seems neither simple nor ignorant. Doesn't the fact that the bible has been, and continues to be used as justification for whatever prejudices support that contention?

Ken wrote "For someone proclaiming that religions of all stripes are somehow above the "greed" of the secularists, take a look in the mirror." In support, he listed some of the more notable examples of religion as a business. I saw no rebuttal from you, only a claim that they are "hate mongers". Note that there was not a claim made that religion was responsible for all evils. That came from you. Again.

Gordy wrote "And there are also factions that wish to whitewash and divert from the very real issue of 'stupid and/or/evil' ministers and priests in this world, aren't there? Like the Catholic Church, which continues its court fights as though they have a chance of being 'innocent' in their coverup. Or any number of gay ministers, adulterous ministers, and abusive priests. It is real, and the youth is aware of the situation. To pretend otherwise is simply not honest." From the perspective of rebellious youth, this issue is quite real and not an ignorant statement. The Catholic church really did, and may still, cover up the actions of it's priests. There are still Ted Haggards out there. Why wouldn't young people look at this and wonder? The only thing the media is doing is letting folks know what is happening and causing people to question. People like Gordy.

What do you offer? Calling them the 3 stooges. Not adults? Your comments seem the more juvenile. Discerning comments? Like Jacob's unintelligible rants which you actually like?

Ken, Gordy, and Robert:

Think of the Catholic Church as a huge lightning rod that can easily handle the largest 2 megavolt lightning bolts. The puny lightning bolts you three generate are from a 1.5 volt AAA battery.

As for "all those pedophile" priests, homosexuality is the agent that is threatening to destroy my beloved church from within. Some dioceses are financially (but not morally) bankrupt because some priests cannot subdue their sexual urges. These priests may burn in Hell, not because of their homosexuality, but because they broke their vows of chastity to God to remain celibate. This is a grievous mortal sin, not a "tiny" venial one forgivable by reciting three Our Fathers and three Hail Marys. More earthly, the Church is paying the innocent victims of these horrendous crimes.

I hear no one in the media viewing the Church or Christianity in this light. For that matter, no one in the liberal and gay communitities either.

The Vatican, through the Catechism, is wrestling with accomodating those who are born gay from Day One without opening the floodgates to those whose homosexuality is by choice. Try to recall the now passe' expression: sexual preference. Maybe the "gay gene" will be discovered someday. Do you think a "bi-sexual gene" will ever be found?

Is this making sense to you three now? You and the secular media attack the Catholic Church only because it is a safe target. The media falsely thinks that God is an elected president or politician. We true believers know that God is King, an absolute monarch. I will lay myself humbly prostate before God but I will never bend a knee to a "president-god" whose values are defined or espoused by the media or Hollywood.

Many are believers of the principle of separation of church and state but who said anything about the separation of God and culture? The media is advancing both principles in the name of their soulless, unfeeling, and false religion.

mfs. This 30th day of March 2007, Anno Domini.

hey Jacob,

I think I actually caught your meaning on that post. Unorthodox but highly original!

They are "Both" (ambiguos) "IDEOLOGICAL" forward thinking and geard towards "Profit" & future bound thinking (Coverage) as if parisites as usuall. Like I say when mail comes: "No News is Good News!" ta Ta. You figure this adage? :=)' SHOLOM!

Ken and Gordy and Robert,

Ah, must be the three stooges of the On Faith section.

What simple and ignorant arguments- "they are all pedophiles" - you might as well through the Jews are cheap and the Polish stupid.

Or the stero type of blind submission and the evils of religion are responsible for all of the world's tragedies. You know nothing about real religion!

In turn around, I could say that all secular humanists are responsible for Stalin, Marx, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler (as a reactionary againt communism). But I am not going to say that because if I did, I would be a simplton or a hate monger and I would join your ranks.

Keep on "entertaining" yourselves guys; in fact, I suggest that you watch American Idol instead of logging into this section so that you dont bother the adults who actually have discerning things to say about religion, philosophy and reality.

The answer to the question is YES

Right now, I feel like the media hyperfocus on Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes gives the impression that all Catholic females from strict Catholic parochial schools are just going to run off with a Scientologist and that the Catholic guys should forget about pursuing them. So is the media trying to portray that the "forbidden fruit" angle always works? Does that mean Catholic guys should pursue females who are raised not to date Catholics (i.e. Jews, Southern Baptists, Protestants)? The media can be irresponsible in putting too much focus on "TomKat."

The tension between religion and the media. The main difficulty that I perceive is the confusion between spirituality and religion. Religion is merely a fools guide to spirituality.

Each and every person is aware of their level of spirituality and how it affects their personal reality. Religion is a mechanism that eliminates the need for personal responsibility when it involves actions and justification,

Many Religions willing assume this duty in exchange for power and blind submission. To make a finer example or a for instance; The insistance by some that the Bible is literally true has allowed many to justifiy a whole range of dispicable behavior by placing certain interpertations on supposedly the literal 'Word of God" to kill,torture,and spread hate and violence. When the media points out the possible contradaictions, the hue and cry of the "Faithful and the Born Again" can be shrill and vituperous. Dobson, Falwell, Robertson and of course the Pope seem clear examples and they each dispise the other. Alas Babylon

Absolutely right about the media's primary concern about making money. As far as the comment about news programs being for "public service" and being money-losers, it has long been known that news programs (both local and national) are the most profitable programs on the air.

Now, let's see....hmmmm...those magnanimous "good" religious folks who are only trying to help humanity and to show people "The Way" (and certainly NOT tainted by greed):

Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker
Jimmy Swaggart
Jerry Falwell
Pat Robertson
Benny Hinn (a personal favorite-LOL)
Joel Osteen
etc, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum

And while we're at it, let's not forget the granddaddy of them all-the Catholic Church with their institutionalized pedophilia. (For which they have paid off millions of dollars and will continue to do so for a long, long time.)

For someone proclaiming that religions of all stripes are somehow above the "greed" of the secularists, take a look in the mirror. At least we secularists are trying, for the most part, to entertain people instead of demanding to be paid to save ourselves from the eternal fires of hell. Talk about snake-oil salesmen (and women).

"There is a youth market that wants to see authority figures debunked, so we see stupid and/or evil ministers and priests portrayed."

And there are also factions that wish to whitewash and divert from the very real issue of 'stupid and/or/evil' ministers and priests in this world, aren't there? Like the Catholic Church, which continues its court fights as though they have a chance of being 'innocent' in their coverup. Or any number of gay ministers, adulterous ministers, and abusive priests. It is real, and the youth is aware of the situation. To pretend otherwise is simply not honest.

It seems the people promoting more 'religion' on the 'news' want only their view to be broadcast, since all the others are not 'real' relingions.

Fr Reese, Very insightful analysis. I agree with most of your premise, but also feel the media takes advantage of christian tolerance and often target christian tenets. I think there has been an almost cowardly approach to other religions by western media because of feared backlash. For example, when was the last time the media expounded on the intolerance of Islamic beliefs or rediculed some of thier preachings? No the media only goes where they are safe and not threatened. Cowards to say the least. Remember the cartoon debacle. The western ran away from that one.

One of the big myths perpetuated in today's culture is the assumption that "liberal" and "traditional religious beliefs" are mutually exclusive. Hot button topics such as evolution, homosexuality and abortion are not the only subjects that traditionally religious people (Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc.) think about. We do not all fit in the "conservative" or "liberal" label about everything. Other things, such as honesty, justice, kindness, care for the sick and aging, peace, dignity for all, etc., affect our day-to-day actions far more than the screechings of attention seekers on both sides of the argument.

While individuals fail, I suspect that both liberals and conservatives believe the sick and aging should receive proper care. I certainly believe this to be a "traditional" religious value.

Neither side has a monopoly on "values" or goodness or kindness or justice or dignity. Really. No matter what the hate mongers would have us believe.

For that matter, many Pagan cultures have/had very different opinions on the hot button issues, too. Remember, worshippers of Aphrodite or Bacchus have/had traditional religious values, as well. Different ones than a modern-day Roman Catholic might have, perhaps, but traditional and religious nonetheless.

To Robert,

Not if these activities are transformed by the media and corps into the normal state of affairs.

If everyone (esp. youth) is focused on wealth and pleasure and this is constantly reinforced in media/movies/ads then who is to say it is wrong?

The idea is to blur the difference between right and wrong and to create an "amazing" generation of consumers who don't know the difference.

To Speed123 --

In the equation you posit, the "cultural conservatives" are laughing all the way to the bank as well. After all, many people pay them money to combat sex, fashion, and self-indulgence...

If people would open their eyes and get away from the circular agruments of polemics (i.e. the right v. left) you will see colusion between both "liberal" and "conservative" in the media/corporate world.

The fact is that traditional religion (I am not talking about Bible belt preachers with mega churches and book deals) is BAD for business on a fundamental level.

Both the liberal (media/hollywood) and the conservatives (corporations) have much to gain from the debasement of culture and the errosion of religious values. When the focus is on the self, on ego and "only one life to live" this produces a much better consumer!

Both the corporation and the media (the conservative and the liberal) want to promote sex, fashion, self-indulgement because this is what sells papers, movies and consumer products.

If you are a slave to your desires and instant gratificaiton then you are a slave to media and big business. No wonder they can't stand religion!

FR. REESE tells us: Media owners are not motivated by principles; they are motivated by market research. They give us what we want

ANN O. replies: Doesn't this assume that the market researchers are asking enough relevant questions? What do they know about religion that qualifies them to know what the relevant questions might be?

Papal, a truly unbiased reporter would have to treat all religion's claims about the supernatural as simply claims, not facts. That sounds like the basis for secularism. How would you suggest a reporter be objective when writing about religion but not be secular?

Mr. Reese,

Very well stated! Both sides have their own agenda. And of course the medias main concern is what sells. I can't blame them for that. But it is frustrating when I do watch a so called documentary hosted by a famous spokesperson that is filled with half lies and half truths. I know that many people will believe either one of the two, without researching the information for themselves. But then again, if a person who has a deep seated hate for religion, he or she will in all likelihood never change their opinion. The same for a extremely religious person. While both sides spout off about how open minded they are.

I am afraid the media is quite against traditional religion. Statistics bear out the personal secular beliefs of the media and polls show the public views the media as liberal. This is beyond dispute at this point.

Fr. is fine to choose to see the media as driven by profits but that doesn't explain the whole picture. The reality is that bias shapes coverage.

Father Reese writes "I find it easier to explain the media by realizing that the principal goal of people running media companies is to make money for themselves and their stockholders."

Very smart and very perceptive comment.

One has to be exceptionally naive (to say the least) to argue that ´the´ media is unbiased. The problem is not merely about one newspaper, but about the totality, which the media, as a whole, is itself embedded in, is an instrument of.

The problem is not that they place too much emphasis on ´religion; but that the ´religion´ that is publicized is little more than that of a state, indeed, a whole nation, that claims divine approval, divine favorotism; believes itself justified to do anything it can get away with, indeed, considers itself divine.

There are now reportedly 750 thousand people dead in Iraq, and still it is argued that removing 1 tyrant, who never threatened the United States, is worth that, and more.

There are now initiatives to exit Iraq, and of course, to deploy elsewhere!

Some God this state or national religion adores. Not much relationship with the God of Life, is there?

Mr. Reese, money is the big motivator, but ideology is big too! Touched by an angel was a sweet show in its own right, but far from religious except to the liberal elite.
Your own magazine is a case in point! It's obvious they aren't looking for a profit! America magazine is pushing a liberal agenda, with you in the forfront, until you were disciplined so to speak by the Vatican.
You always seem to go against Catholic teaching! Your kind has come and gone through the ages and will again {gnostics, arianism, manichaeans}. I don't know why you don't just join the Episcopalians or Unitarians!

To Russell D.--

I dunno. That whole "sword-growing" thing that Lion-o did seemed awfully phallic to me... :)

They should bring back the Thundercats show. That was a good wholesome show, and it didn't have Christian undertones. It had life lessons in almost all of the episodes.

As a father, I've become suspicious of the term "family-friendly" in entertainment. Sometimes it means what I would like it to mean - no violence, and characters learn the natural consequences of actions that help or harm others. But more often, the term is used as a synonym for adherence to Christian doctrine, which doesn't necessarily equate to family-friendly. Some of the religious-right groups brand a show as having "sexual content" if one of the characters is gay, even when homosexuality itself is not discussed.

I work in the media, and the business side of the house works separately from the editorial side of the house. My co-workers are overwhelmingly on the Left side of the political spectrum, and I'm about the only traditionalist on the staff.

The Left is blinded by its Marxist biases.

Thank you, Father Reese, for putting such a fine point on the problem. The media is indeed a business and, as such, is motivated by profit far more than by ideology.

I also think you are spot on regarding the media's ignorance regarding religion. However, as I posted in the general comment section, this is not really the fault of the media itself, but the fault of the consumer. After all, the American attention span is incredibly short, so the media has to tailor its product to that fact. As a result, ideas that need deep analysis tend not to get covered...

Fr. Reese,

You're right in what you say.

What bothers me about the media and religion is that the media are so terrified of offending organized religions that they won't report untoward happenings or criticize them when they deserve it.

It takes a tsunami of the magnitude of the Massachusetts priest scandal before the media will deign even to report that Religionville is apparently getting a little damp.