Podcasts

Podcast: What role did God-talk play in Tucker Carlson's fall at Fox News? Good question

Podcast: What role did God-talk play in Tucker Carlson's fall at Fox News? Good question

Rod “Live Not By Lies” Dreher has shared the following anecdote many times, but it’s especially interesting that he used it, once again, in this Substack post: “Tucker Fired Because Of Religion.”

I am using it to open this podcast post because this week’s “Crossroads” discussion (CLICK HERE to tune that in) isn’t really about Tucker Carlson’s forced exit from Fox News — it’s about whether Carlson was a very good fit with the Fox News political and cultural worldview in the first place.

My theory is that Carlson is a conservative populist — as opposed to being a D.C. Beltway Republican — and that his religious beliefs (especially after he stopped drinking) are part of that mix. This created tension with the dominant Fox News management culture, which is rooted in the Page 3 Libertarian Republican beliefs of titan Rupert Murdoch and the network’s original mastermind, the now disgraced Roger Ailes.

This brings me back to Dreher’s anecdote:

I have long wondered why Fox News doesn’t have much religious reporting, or cover things including a religious angle, even though many of their loyal viewers are religious. Now I know. And you should know too. You might recall my telling the story about how the freelancers Fox hired to cover the 2002 Catholic bishops’ meeting in Dallas, the first one after the scandal broke, asked me to brief them on who the players were, and what the issues were. They took copious notes, but when I told them about the homosexual clerical networks, and their roles in the scandal, they told me to stop. “Orders from the top of the network: stay away from that stuff,” I was told. I told them that you couldn’t understand the scandal without that factor. Maybe so, they said, but we are ordered not to touch it.

Thus, Dreher argues that Carlson’s forced exit should open the eyes of Fox News-hooked religious and cultural conservatives.

Whatever Rupert Murdoch’s internal motivations, the fact is — well, to be precise, what I confidently believe to be the truth — that Tucker Carlson gave an extraordinary speech about the theological aspect of the cultural crisis we are enduring. He talked bluntly, to an audience at Washington’s leading conservative think tank, about the fundamentally spiritual nature of the fights we’re in. And he encouraged his audience to pray for our country.

Several days later, he was fired.

As you would expect, this brings us to the much-discussed Vanity Fair feature that ran with a headline proclaiming, “Tucker Carlson’s Prayer Talk May Have Led to Fox News Ouster: “That Stuff Freaks Rupert Out.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Can journalists and religious leaders learn how to talk about what 'news' is?

Podcast: Can journalists and religious leaders learn how to talk about what 'news' is?

Day after day, year after year (this week opened year 35 for my national “On Religion” column) I receive all kinds of “press releases” from people who want me to write columns about this, that or the other.

Some folks still send these printed on dead-tree pulp, if you can imagine that. The vast majority arrive via email or in press kits (mainly for books) via UPS, Fedex or the U.S. Postal Service.

I am happy to check out most of this material. However, about 90% or more of these offerings are sent by PR professionals who appear to have zero idea what I write about or the audience for my columns. They are simply throwing cheerful digital spaghetti at the wall and hoping something sticks.

In short, they do not understand “news” — what it is and what it is not.

What can religious leaders and/or organizations do to improve their success rates with reporters like me? That was half the equation that we discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here for temporary link to tune that in).

The other half? Just flip that reporter’s notebook around. How can reporters do a better job finding the right voices to include in their coverage of events and trends linked to religion? How can journalists convince clergy and other religious folks to cooperate with press coverage — especially when dealing with controversial topics and scandals?

The podcast was recorded while I was in Los Angeles for two forums hosted by the Poynter Institute under this title: “Telling the Stories of Faith and the Faithful.” The first forum was for reporters and editors, including quite a few who are not religion-beat specialists. The second day, yes, focused on talks with a small circle of religious leaders about understanding how journalists think and work.

We were talking about many of the same questions and issues on both days — only viewed from different sides of a reporter’s notebook (or smartphone, in this age). Here is a bite of the Poynter summary of the session with reporters:


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Thinking with Ryan Burge, at Substack: White Christians are becoming more Republican

Thinking with Ryan Burge, at Substack: White Christians are becoming more Republican

Editor’s note: You knew this was coming, sooner or later. Ryan Burge has packed up lots of his charts and headed to Substack. With his blessing, as part of his cooperation with this blog, we will offer chunks of those articles and point readers to them.

———

Everyone who even tacitly thinks about religion and politics is well aware of the linkage between white Christians the Republican party. But, I think that is a pretty severe oversimplification of what is actually happening.

I took the Cooperative Election Study’s 2008 wave and compared it to the just released 2022 wave. Both surveys were conducted right around election season. White Christians are those who identify as Protestant, Catholic, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or Eastern Orthodox.

Here are the overall shifts in the share who identify with the Republican party in 2022 vs 2008. A negative number denotes movement toward the Democrats - note how rarely that happens.

Almost all the story can be found in the bottom left boxes — that’s those with low levels of education and attend church in frequently. Those shifts there are at least ten percentage points. Among those who seldom or never attend and have a high school diploma or less — it’s a 21 percentage point difference.

That’s huge.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Do readers need to know the 'why' factor in the Covenant School shootings?

Podcast: Do readers need to know the 'why' factor in the Covenant School shootings?

Before returning to mainstream news coverage of the attack on Covenant Presbyterian Church and its school, let’s look at a story that raises similar issues — in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Consider this new information linked to this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in).

The headline on a KRDO report: “Manifesto details former student’s plans to carry out multiple Colorado Springs school shootings.” Yes, note the word “manifesto.”

In this case, police are dealing with threats, not actions. However, journalists covering this story face some familiar questions about content and emphasis. Let’s pick this up at the second paragraph.

According to the 18th Judicial District Attorney’s Office, 19-year-old William Whitworth - who identifies as “Lilly”- was charged after an investigation into "threats involving schools in Colorado Springs Academy District 20."

The context for this story is Colorado Springs. What do we know about that “conservative” city, in terms of its media profile? Here is an interesting headline from The Guardian: “Colorado Springs: a playground for pro-life, pro-gun evangelical Christians.

Back to the very low-key Colorado news report:

Once inside [the home], deputies noted in the affidavit two holes that appeared to be punch marks in the wall. The door to a bedroom was off its hinges and lying beside the opening. … The sister identified herself as Lilly, but further investigation determined her birth name is William Whitworth.

Once again, readers face that familiar, but suddenly controversial, question from the old-school journalism equation “who,” “what,” “when,” “where,” “why” and “how.”

A dozen or so paragraphs and news-you-can-use bullet lists into the story, readers finally learn:

When asked if she was going to shoot up a school, the affidavit states Whitworth "visibly shook her head and down indicating yes." When asked why she'd do that, Whitworth stated, "Why does anyone do it." …

While waiting for the fire department, Whitworth was asked how much she had been planning the school shooting. She stated she was "about a third of the way from doing it," verifying again that Timberview Middle School was one of the "main targets" currently and other targets were churches.

There’s some (#triggerwarning) anti-Donald Trump material in this troubled young person’s writings, as well. But it would be interesting — since Colorado Springs is internationally known as a haven for evangelical ministries — to know just a bit more (as in anything) about the targeted “churches.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Was the attack on a conservative Presbyterian school in Nashville a religion story?

Podcast: Was the attack on a conservative Presbyterian school in Nashville a religion story?

Was the attack on the elementary school at Nashville’s Covenant Presbyterian Church a religion-news story?

Of course it was, for at least four reasons that we discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in).

(1) It was an attack on a conservative Christian school at a conservative Presbyterian church in a city that is often called the buckle fn the Bible Belt (although locals know that the Nashville establishment, especially in media, is left of center).

(2) Religious groups have played a major role in Tennessee debates about parental rights, education and LGBTQ issues. What does that have to do with the shooting? Hold that thought.

(3) Religious groups have played a major role in discussions of gun-control legislation in Tennessee and, in this case, it is important to avoid political labels such as “liberal” and “conservative” in that discussion.

(4) The young adult who attacked the Covenant School was a former student there. Audrey Hale had recently identified as Aiden Hale in social media, with male pronouns. Hale was still living in a conservative Christian home, with a mother who both was a strong advocate of gun control and on the staff of Village Chapel in Nashville.

What else do news readers know about the shooter? That depends — in this new age of partisan, advocacy media — on which news organizations a reader follows. In most mainstream coverage, even in Nashville, questions about the life and beliefs of the shooter have all but vanished.

Consider this short paragraph late, late in a Religion News Service follow-up report: “Grief, fear haunt Nashville as residents gather to mourn in wake of Covenant shooting.”

Very little is known about the shooter, a former student at Covenant who was killed by police. The shooter reportedly left a manifesto that has not been made public. 

Really? “Very” little?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Painful fighting inside Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Schism began long before the war

Podcast: Painful fighting inside Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Schism began long before the war

Nearly 15 years ago, I traveled to Kiev to speak during a forum with Ukrainian journalists, and a few activists, focusing on religion coverage in that already tense nation. I was there as a representative of the Oxford Centre for Religion & Public Life.

Obviously, this meant talking about the fractured state of Eastern Orthodox Christianity in Ukraine, with bitter tensions between the historic (in many ways ancient) Ukrainian Orthodox Church and new rival churches — including leaders who had previously been excommunicated from canonical Orthodoxy.

Again, let me stress that this was in 2009, during a time when the Ukrainian government was, basically, content to let global Orthodox leaders work this out — oh so slowly — as an Orthodox canon-law issue.

These conflicts were truly byzantine (small “b”) and Ukrainian journalists said it was obvious that most journalists from Europe and America knew next to nothing about the Orthodox splits and, frankly, didn’t care to learn the details.

The Holy Dormition-Kiev Caves Lavra? That’s just a historic site. End of story.

Things have changed, sort of, but for all the wrong reasons.

With Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, journalists now care about the state of Orthodoxy in this war. The question discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) is whether elite journalists have any interest in the centuries of facts behind the current Orthodox conflict. The church conflict is linked, of course, to the February 24, 2022, invasion — but also to earlier actions by leaders in the United States, the European Union, the current Ukrainian government and, last but not least, a strategic 2019 move by the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul.

Note: All of these events took place before the Russian invasion. The Orthodox schism in Ukraine predates the war — by decades.

Where to begin? Let’s start with some of what I learned, and described, 15 years ago, in a column with this title: “Religion ghosts in Ukraine.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Is 'post-truth America' a right-wing or a left-wing term? Please discuss

Podcast: Is 'post-truth America' a right-wing or a left-wing term? Please discuss

Please ponder this pair of true or false questions.

When religious, cultural and political liberals complained about Donald Trump promoting his own “alternative facts” for use in the mainstream press, did they have a valid point? Was it fair game for them to apply the academic term “post-truth” in this case?

When religious, cultural and political conservatives complained about Democrats and their Big Tech-Big Media allies burying coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, funders of Antifa, origin debates about COVID-19 and Jane’s Revenge attacks on churches and crisis-pregnancy centers, did they have a valid point? Was it fair game for them to apply the academic term “post-truth” in this case?

I would argue that the correct answer is “yes,” in both cases.

Debates about the meaning of the term “post-truth” were at the heart of this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). There was a logical reason for that, since Clemente Lisi and I were speakers in a March 10-11 conference in Washington, D.C., with this title: “Journalism in a Post-Truth World.” The conference was sponsored by Franciscan University of Steubenville and the Eternal Word Television Network.

The Franciscan University press release afterwards noted that the participants included journalists from the “National Catholic Register, The Washington Post, OSV News, Fox News, CNN, RealClearPolitics, The Catholic Herald, The Spectator, Washington Examiner, National Review, The Daily Signal, Catholic News Agency, The Daily Caller, and GetReligion.” Well, I had requested that I be identified as a columnist with the Universal press syndicate, but I wear several hats.

That’s a list that clearly leans to newsrooms on the cultural right, but with some solid mainstream voices as well. For example, I was on a panel about Catholic news coverage with the (in my eyes) legendary religion-beat pro Ann Rodgers, best known for several decades with the Pittsburgh Press and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Also, click here for a Lisi post at Religion Unplugged about his presentation.

It’s safe to say that someone was there from the National Catholic Reporter, because of this headline in that progressive Catholic publication: “EWTN-sponsored conference on journalism embraces right-wing 'post-truth' narrative.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: When is preaching a 'news' story? Ah, the temptation of ChatGPT sermons

Podcast: When is preaching a 'news' story? Ah, the temptation of ChatGPT sermons

When is preaching newsworthy?

News consumers of a certain age may remember this famous Associated Press headline: “Priest Told Children That Santa Claus Is Dead.

More recently, a Catholic priest in County Kerry made headlines around the world when he dared to preach a sermon defending centuries of Catholic teachings on abortion, marriage and sex — while reminding the faithful that the concept of “mortal sin” is serious business. His bishop was not amused.

Thus, controversial sermons are news, in part because editors don’t expects sermons to be controversial?

The act of preaching can also become “newsy” when it is linked to a trendy subject in modern life. That’s the equation: Old thing (preaching) gets hitched to hip new thing.

Right now, one of the hot topics in the public square is the rise of artificial intelligence and, to be specific, the ChatGPT website. Thus, this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) focused on several “newsy” angles of the recent Associated Press story that ran with the headline, “Pastors’ view: Sermons written by ChatGPT will have no soul.”

In a way, this whole AI preaching topic is linked to another “preaching that is news” trend that shows up every now and then — plagiarism in the pulpit. Overworked, stressed-out pastors have been known to cut a few corners and use material from other preachers, without letting the faithful know what they were doing. But that’s actually a very old story. See this On Religion column that starts with a case study from 1876.

During the podcast, I riffed on the whole issue that different kinds of technology can shape the content of communications in different ways. If ChatGPT sermons have a sense of “soul,” it would be a “soul” that is defined by the creator of the software and the tech platform.

This made me think back the early 1990s, when I was teaching at Denver Seminary and asking future pastors to think about the many ways that mass-media messages shape the lives of their flocks and, of course, the unchurched people around them (here is an essay on that seminary work).

During that time, I read an article — on paper, alas — about how the creation of studio microphones changed the content of American popular music, even at the level of lyrics in love songs.

Think about Frank Sinatra. As a young big-band singer, he belted out bold, strong, LOUD songs about commitment and romantic love that would never die. He had to be heard over that big band. But give Sinatra a microphone and, well, these songs turned into smooth, soft, seductive messages — urgent whispers of desire.

I wondered: How did microphones affect the style and theological content of preaching?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Zero elite press coverage of 'heresy' accusations against an American cardinal?

Podcast: Zero elite press coverage of 'heresy' accusations against an American cardinal?

The question at the heart of this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) was not whether Springfield (Ill.) Bishop Thomas Paprocki was on target with his First Things essay that all but accused San Diego Cardinal Robert McElroy of heresy.

The question was not whether Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich of Luxembourg — a strategic leader in the Vatican’s Synod on Synodality — was right when he said the church's teaching on homosexuality are “no longer correct,” and added, “I think it is time for a fundamental revision of the doctrine."

The question was not whether Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich was correct when he suggested, in print, that priests should absolve Catholics who come to Confession, allowing them to receive Holy Communion, even if these individuals refuse to repent of behaviors that Catholic doctrine insists are sin.

The question was not what Pope Francis meant when he told bishops in the Congo, “Always. Always forgive in the Sacrament of Reconciliation” — even if there is confusion about whether penitents are repenting of their sins or not.

No, the journalism question discussed during this podcast was this: Why are these developments — especially that stunning “Imagining a Heretical Cardinal” essay by Paprocki — receiving (as of this morning) zero coverage in the mainstream press?

By the way, it’s important that Bishop Paprocki is the chairman-elect of the Canonical Affairs and Church Governance Committee of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

It may also be relevant that, in 2017, Paprocki and McElroy clashed — in print — over the Springfield bishop’s decision not to allow Catholics to receive Holy Communion if they are openly living in same-sex marriages and, thus, rejecting centuries of Catholic doctrines on marriage and sex.

Why the lack of coverage? I have several theories.


Please respect our Commenting Policy