Kellerism

These ratings and tips on media bias can help news consumers and journalists (updated)

These ratings and tips on media bias can help news consumers and journalists (updated)

On Inauguration Day last week, CNN was newly proclaimed to be politically on the "Left," joining rival MSNBC. Previously, the cable news net was in the softer "Lean Left" category that includes news coverage by The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time magazine, The Economist, The Atlantic, Bloomberg, Politico, ABC, CBS and NBC.

Meanwhile, Fox News, New York Post, Washington Examiner, Washington Times, Christianity Today, ChristianPost.com and Salt Lake City's Latter-day Saint Church-owned Deseret News are considered to "Lean Right." Breitbart, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, Federalist and Fox News opinion shows are straight-up "Right," as is the Rev. Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network.

Not many major news organizations are positioned in the less partisan "Center." They include The Associated Press (though its Fact Check feature "Leans Left"), Axios, BBC, Christian Science Monitor, Forbes, NPR news (though its opinion fare "Leans Left"), Reuters, The Hill, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal's news copy.

Who sez?

The team at Allsides.com, whose continually updated "Media Bias Ratings" compiled from readers and viewers judge 800 outlets on the five-point scale, ranging from BiblicalSexology.com (!) to ZeroHedge.com. The site also posts current media examples that demonstrate ideological slant, as well as articles of interest to reporters such as a history of "wokeness" picked up from Vox.com (rated "Left").

The judgments are debatable, of course, but worth considering.

The bias-o-meter assesses only online media postings, not what's issued in print or broadcast. We're told that ratings "do not reflect accuracy or credibility; they reflect perspective only."

Though "bias" sounds negative, this site doesn't oppose point-of-view journalism but seeks to fairly characterize news organizations and inform consumers accordingly.

Allsides boasts that its three co-founders are "a proud, active Republican" and former party operative, "a proud, active Democrat" who co-founded MoveOn.org, and the tech guy who's "more centrist and less active politically." The operation lives off donations, which have included groups linked with the likes of Tom Steyer on the left and Charles Koch on the right.

The Guy especially calls attention to this site's memo on "How to Spot 11 Types of Media Bias."


Please respect our Commenting Policy

The New York Times looks at QAnon leader who is, wait, a Manhattan mystic from Harvard?

The New York Times looks at QAnon leader who is, wait, a Manhattan mystic from Harvard?

It would have been hard to have consumed mainstream press coverage during the 2020 race for the White House without hearing quite a bit about the impact of QAnon and other conspiracy theories on the most dedicated followers of Donald Trump. Conspiracy theories on the other side of American life? Not so much.

At the same time, for totally valid reasons, it was impossible to read about QAnon and other conspiracy theories without hearing about their impact in church pews, as well as blue-collar bars. In some media reports, QAnon was presented as an “evangelical” Christian movement, pure and simple.

Here at GetReligion, we have argued that the impact of QAnon in grassroots evangelical culture has been obvious and that this is an important story. (See this post, in particular: “Thinking about QAnon — Joe Carter sends strong warning to evangelicals about new heresy.”)

At the same time, it has been hard — so far — to argue that there is evidence that major institutions, denominations and leaders at the heart of evangelical culture have been sucked into this tragedy. (See this podcast and post, in particular: “New York Times says 'Christian nationalism' tied to white 'evangelical power'.”)

At this point, I am convinced that QAnon is, to use Joe Carter’s term, a “political cult” led by social-media activists who clearly know how to rattle the chains of evangelicals who are obsessed with speculating about the End Of All Things.

With all of that in mind, I was interested to dig into the recent New York Times multi-media feature that ran with this dramatic double-decker headline:

A QAnon ‘Digital Soldier’ Marches On, Undeterred by Theory’s Unraveling

Valerie Gilbert posts dozens of times a day in support of an unhinged conspiracy theory. The story of this “meme queen” hints at how hard it will be to bring people like her back to reality.

I assumed that this story would contain some religious content, if not clouds of speculation about evangelical involvement in QAnon.

So who is Gilbert?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Creative ways to cover abortion stories near Roe v. Wade anniversary: Here's a few ideas

Creative ways to cover abortion stories near Roe v. Wade anniversary: Here's a few ideas

I always get frustrated with the lack of original thought when it comes to covering abortion stories connected to the anniversaries of Roe v. Wade. Last week’s reporting for the 48th anniversary was no exception.

There was the predictable updates (which I am not criticizing), such as President Joe Biden’s intent to codify Roe v. Wade, which the Catholic-news website Crux covered here. And Fox News ran a piece about a restrictive abortion law passed by the state of Tennessee last summer , and how that has become ensnared in the courts.

Now I know that, with the inauguration on the same week and all, there wasn’t a lot of energy out there to come up with Roe v. Wade stories that covered new ground. But the stories are out there, folks. It’s just that many of those in the media don’t feel like ferreting them out. Let’s suggest a few:

(1) Since Black Lives Matter has been a major newsmaker this past year, how about a revisit on black abortion rates? About a year ago, the Arizona Capital Times ran this opinion piece by a black member of the state house of representatives. I’ll pull out one paragraph:

The impacts on our black communities are hard to fathom. According to the Guttmacher Institute, which generally supports abortion, in 2011 360,000 black babies were aborted. CDC statistics for 2011 show that 287,072 black deaths occurred from all other causes excluding abortion. By these numbers, abortion is the leading cause of death among blacks.

Shouldn’t there be more reporting on something that kills more black children than police brutality ever has? Can’t say I’ve seen a whole lot. This story is also linked to debates in the Black church about politics, social issues, family, etc.

(2) Personality profiles. The pro-choicers get loads of them, such as this 2018 Washington Post piece about a black gynecologist who went from being anti-abortion to pro-abortion rights — and why. This was Willie Parker. The Atlantic, however, went more creative and much deeper in a feature about a war in the abortion movement where Parker is being accused of sexual assault, and the nasty infighting that’s resulted from that. Insider politics is always an interesting read, must say.

But where are the profiles of folks like Lila Rose and Joan Andrews Bell and many other lesser-known folks?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Catholic press braces for Biden presidency: How it will further polarization on doctrine

Catholic press braces for Biden presidency: How it will further polarization on doctrine

Inauguration Day this year comes two weeks after pro-Trump rioters descended on the U.S. Capitol before President-elect Joe Biden’s victory was certified by lawmakers. It was the latest — and most stark — demonstration of how our nation’s media ecosystem is in a state of decay and under attack.

Two weeks removed from that awful day, it’s worth taking stock in where we are, how we got here and, more importantly, what can we expected over the next four years under Biden.

This road, more than a decade in the making, was exasperated by Donald Trump’s presidential run and election in 2016. At the same time, citizens on the left and right have grown increasingly weary of institutions (the press being one of them) and that’s made violence an acceptable means for retribution.

As a result, the political, cultural and religious polarization that has taken place over the past four years, ignited further last year amid a pandemic and the presidential election, can’t be undone. The violence on Jan. 6 in Washington, D.C. is the latest tangible example of where we are as a country. The National Catholic Register made this observation in the wake of the riot:

The United States is troubled today by something deeper: At its core this is a spiritual and cultural crisis, even more than a political one.

The Founding Fathers worried about the same factionalism we saw on full and ugly display at the Capitol. But in the past, as Alexis de Tocqueville observed in Democracy in America, shared religious values have provided a glue that allowed for peaceful coexistence in our strikingly individualistic nation, while reminding us that politics was not ultimate.

Today, that is no longer the case. The system of Judeo-Christian values that grounded our political and civic life for more than two centuries has eroded and not been replaced. The ensuing vacuum means our national tendency toward factionalism has no “ballast” to steady the ship of state at turbulent moments, such as this disputed presidential transition.

The events of the last six months and how they have been covered by news organizations — spanning the COVID-19 lockdowns and #BlackLivesMatter protests to the presidential race and the attack on the Capitol — mark an end to an era in press history. It would appear that the American Model of the Press is dead and that reality has become mangled as Americans get their news through a prism of advocacy, partisan media sources.

This journalism earthquake has shaken Catholic media, as well. Hold on, because that’s where we are headed.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Evangelical 'power' and U.S. Capitol rioting: What about Franklin Graham and Falwell Jr.?

Evangelical 'power' and U.S. Capitol rioting: What about Franklin Graham and Falwell Jr.?

As a rule, I don’t use GetReligion posts to respond to feedback from readers. But several people — in emails, for the most part — have raised two crucial, and valid, questions about last week’s “Crossroads” podcast and post: “New York Times says 'Christian nationalism' tied to white 'evangelical power'.”

Actually, it’s the same question asked in two different ways. Hold that thought.

In the podcast and post, I argued that a much-read New York Times piece (“How White Evangelical Christians Fused With Trump Extremism“) did a fine job while offering illustrations that conspiracy theories such as the QAnon gospel have soaked into many pews and a few pulpits, especially in independent (and often small) charismatic and evangelical churches. My question was whether the feature provided solid evidence for this thesis:

The blend of cultural references, and the people who brought them, made clear a phenomenon that has been brewing for years now: that the most extreme corners of support for Mr. Trump have become inextricable from some parts of white evangelical power in America. Rather than completely separate strands of support, these groups have become increasingly blended together.

The key word was “power,” as in “some parts of evangelical power” becoming “inextricable” from the “most extreme” forms of Trump support — which has to be a reference to those who planned, not the legal National Mall rally for Trump, but the illegal armed attack on the U.S. Capitol.

In response, I wrote:

… Anyone who studies “evangelicalism” — white or otherwise — knows that we are talking about a movement based on the work of powerful denominations (this includes megachurches), parachurch groups, publishers (and authors) and major colleges, universities and seminaries.

This led to several people asking this valid question: What about the Rev. Franklin Graham? Others asked: What about Jerry Falwell, Jr., and Liberty University?

These are certainly examples of evangelical brand names — Graham and Falwell.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New podcast: New York Times says 'Christian nationalism' tied to white 'evangelical power'

New podcast: New York Times says  'Christian nationalism' tied to white 'evangelical power'

At the 2016 Southern Baptist Convention, messengers from churches across the nation approved a resolution calling for Americans to “discontinue the display of the Confederate battle flag as a sign of solidarity of the whole Body of Christ.”

The speaker of the Mississippi House of Representatives, Philip Gunn, was there (full Baptist Press report here) as chair of the Southern Baptist Seminary board of trustees. He went home determined to help do something about his state’s flag. Mississippi’s new flag dropped the Confederate symbolism of the old, replaced by a magnolia blossom and the phrase “In God We Trust.”

This is clearly an example of a major evangelical institution using its clout — “power,” if you will.

This brings us — using a back door, I will admit — to this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to listen to that), which focuses on the waves of coverage about Christians symbols and banners among participants in both the “Save America March” backing Donald Trump and the deadly riot outside and inside the U.S. Capitol. How did some F-bomb screaming rioters end up chanting “Hang Mike Pence!” while others nearby played loud Contemporary Christian Music?

The hook for this rather complicated podcast discussion with host Todd Wilken was one of those voice-from-on-high, magisterial New York Times passages — with zero attribution to sources — that speaks for the Acela Zone ruling elites. The double-decker headline proclaimed:

How White Evangelical Christians Fused With Trump Extremism

A potent mix of grievance and religious fervor has turbocharged the support among Trump loyalists, many of whom describe themselves as participants in a kind of holy war.

Are we talking about ALL Trump loyalists? Or is it simply MANY of them? Hold that thought, because we will return to it shortly.

But here is the key passage that needs to be read carefully, more than once:

The blend of cultural references, and the people who brought them, made clear a phenomenon that has been brewing for years now: that the most extreme corners of support for Mr. Trump have become inextricable from some parts of white evangelical power in America. Rather than completely separate strands of support, these groups have become increasingly blended together.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New podcast: Who stands in the middle of American politics? Often, that's a religion question

New podcast: Who stands in the middle of American politics? Often, that's a religion question

There were two major stories in American life this week, when it seemed like the world turned in a matter of minutes.

The riot at the U.S. Capitol grew out of yet another legal Donald Trump rally, with its familiar mix of hero worship, populist rage and, yes, rhetoric and symbols used by conservative, often Pentecostal, Christians. Fired up by a truly radical message from the president, many (not all) of these protestors marched to Capitol and turned into an illegal mob, crashing through security fences and then through doors and windows. Yes, some of the Christian banners and signs went with them.

We will be learning more about the makeup of that mob as participants are identified, arrest and tried — perhaps under (irony alert) Trump’s June 26th executive order authorizing a “penalty of up to 10 years’ imprisonment for the willful injury of Federal property.”

There have been waves of statements by religious leaders condemning the violence, including many by evangelicals who (a) opposed Trump, (b) reluctantly voted for him or (c) enthusiastically backed him. I expect more coverage on all of that (I’m collecting material for an “On Religion” column). Readers can start with this piece from the left, care of HuffPost.com: “Trump’s Evangelical Allies Condemn Violence At The Capitol.” It focuses on evangelicals who are still finding it hard to attack Trump, while — almost hidden at the end — noting views from some of condemned both the violence and the president’s role in it.

Let me know, via comments or email, if you see more religion-driven riot coverage.

Meanwhile, this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) centered on a GetReligion post that was written about two hours before the riots began: “Life after Georgia — Questions about a pro-life Democrat in U.S. Senate and other issues ...

The key is that victories by two Democrats (one a liberal Baptist pastor) put a very interesting conservative (and Catholic) senator at the middle of America’s increasingly divided and even bloody political map.

That man, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, is a living symbol of what used to be a major force in American politics — the white Southern Democrat. Although he has been endorsed by Democrats For Life, his pragmatic political views on that topic will not be found in the Democratic or Republican platforms, but do resemble the views of millions of centrist Americans.

Many Democrats, in the past, have insisted that Manchin is not really a Democrat. Well, how many want to toss him out of the party right now (with that 50-50 Senate split)?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New York Times digs into 'The Messiah' and finds emotions, art, politics and very little Christianity

Gentle readers, please allow me a second moment of reflection on the challenges of secular journalists attempting to cover news stories centering on great works of sacred choral music. I have, after all, been a choral musician since I was 6-years-old and I didn’t jump into journalism until I discovered that it’s hard to major in music at a major university if one cannot play the piano.

The other day, I took a look at a New York Times feature about the unsuccessful efforts at the KIng’s College at Cambridge University to carry on — damn the coronavirus, full speed ahead — with its world-famous Christmas Eve performance of “The Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols.”

As you can tell from my snarky headline, I thought it was strange that the Times team didn’t include anything about the contents of this Anglican worship service, including the fact that the “lessons” are, in fact, lengthy passages of scripture. Thus, the headline: “New York Times asks: Did COVID shut down live festival of content-free lessons and carols?”

I didn’t expect a religion-beat story. However, I still thought it was strange (or, alas, not so strange) to completely skip over the religious intent and message of a worship service held in a chapel. After all, as noted in this Cambridge essay about the rite:

Wherever the service is heard and however it is adapted, whether the music is provided by choir or congregation, the pattern and strength of the service, as Dean [Eric] Milner-White pointed out, derive from the lessons and not the music. ‘The main theme is the development of the loving purposes of God ...’ seen ‘through the windows and words of the Bible’. Local interests appear, as they do here, in the bidding prayer, and personal circumstances give point to different parts of the service. Many of those who took part in the first service must have recalled those killed in the Great War when it came to the famous passage ‘all those who rejoice with us but on another shore and in a greater light’. The centre of the service is still found by those who ‘go in heart and mind’ and who consent to follow where the story leads.

So might these Bible passages about life, death, suffering and new hope have been relevant during the COVID-tide of 2020? Apparently, that is not a topic one could expect to read about in The New York Times.

But what about the even more famous scripture passages, images and themes in “The Messiah” by George Frideric Handel?

Surely the Times team couldn’t produce a feature story — “Meet the People Who Can’t Bring You ‘Messiah’ This Year” — about why this work is so important to listeners and performers without discussing the content of this sacred classic? Maybe a tiny splash of digital ink, like one or two paragraphs?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New year and many old issues: Catholic storylines journalists need to keep an eye on in 2021

I am not a very good prognosticator. Yet this is the time of year that forces many journalists to do just that.

What will 2021 bring? That’s the big question following a 2020 that will forever remain a year where the world was held hostage by a pandemic. It was also a year where we had a combative presidential election and a reawakened social justice movement that brought our divided politics out into our streets. Could any of us have accurately predicted what 2020 would have been like? I don’t think so.

That hasn’t stopped many from trying to predict what next year will be like. The vaccine could bring with it prosperity and freedom again, but a new strain of the virus has forced much of Europe into lockdown once again. A lot of what 2021 will look like — in terms of religion and faith — will depend on the virus and how politicians choose to handle it.

It’s true that the pandemic exposed all kinds of issues in our society. The journalism that is tasked with objectively reporting these issues so that citizens can make informed decisions failed us miserably, a trend that was years in the making, but peaked in 2020 with the presidential election. My post from this past June highlighted this extremely difficult realization for me after more than 20 years in the business. Here’s the main thrust of that post:

News coverage — be it about politics, culture or religion — is largely made up of crimes (in the legal sense) or lapses in judgement (in a moral one). But the news media has changed in the Internet age, primarily because of social media. Facebook, Twitter and TikTok, to name just three, allows users — everyday people — to pump out content. That content can take many forms — from benign observations to what’s called hot takes — for all to read and see.

Truth, fact checking and context are not important. What matters are likes and followers. What we have now is something some have called “The Great Awokening” and it appears to have forever transformed our political discourse and the journalism that tries to report on it.

Mainstream news organizations, in their quest for clicks amid hope of figuring out a new business model, now mirror the content we all see on social media platforms. Newsrooms loaded with a younger generation who grew up in this environment have imposed their own woke politics as their morality thermometer.

The news media both underplayed COVID-19 and then hyped it, only to pause their concern in the wake of the George Floyd protests. For a list of 2020 media misses, check out this roundup.

That’s in the past now, but we will indeed be talking about 2020 for years and decades to come. Instead of trying to predict the future, the aim of this post is to advise mainstream journalists on what the major Catholic news storylines will be over the next 12 months — in the United States and the world.


Please respect our Commenting Policy