Get Religion is a national and global journalism site focusing on how the mainstream press covers religion news in politics, entertainment, business and sports.
Let me jump in here with a quick follow-up on my recent post about press coverage of the Democratic Party platform’s new language on issues linked to abortion and the sanctity of life.
Out there in cyberspace, insiders seem to be doing some fresh thinking about their love-hate relationships with their regular readers and frequent comment-part writers (including trolls). I took a stab at that topic the other day here at GetReligion, so you can click here if you want to see that.
When you talk to website editors these days, it’s very easy to figure out that most of them have a love-hate relationship with the “comments pages” that are such a big part of what the whole interactive Web 2.0 thing is supposed to be about.
I know, I know. I have said what I have to say already about the mini-firestorm over Sally Quinn of the Washington Post electing to receive the Sacrament of Holy Communion at the funeral Mass for the late Tim Russert. I really don’t want to have readers start clicking “comment” again to talk about the theology of this or the state of Catholic canon law.
There’s been something of a trend among a certain subsection of evolutionary anthropologists to explain religion as the product of a gene. Not that there is any evidence of a religion gene, mind you. Heck, not that there’s any evidence that such a gene is possible! But if there was, you see, it could explain Methodists.
The professionals over at Religion News Service would like us to pass along the fact that they have radically updated and enlarged their blog about religion news.
Sometimes I’m surprised at how little the media covers the vibrant world of online religion. Snejana Farberov of Columbia News Service penned a piece about, loosely, God and the internet. She describes how churches broadcast their sermons online:
