Smart Religion Reporters?
by Paul M. Weyrich

A long overdue debate has been ignited thanks to a recent article by Washington Times reporter Julia Duin posted on Poynter Online. In it Duin asserted that too many newspapers, TV news stations and networks are failing to cover religion, and those that do have been failing to hire journalists who truly understand religion.

I could not agree more and I suspect that many Americans share that sentiment. Too often news reporting is "dumbed down" to make way for "entertainment" and "lifestyle" reporting. But what do you think is the most important influence in the lifestyles led by the 42% of respondents to the 2004 CNN exit poll who either attend church weekly or more than weekly!

In her article "Help Wanted On The Religion Beat" Duin states, "With concern about values registering high in exit polls last election, the question was raised as to why journalists didn't shed more light on such concerns and the people who hold them." Her answer is that most newspapers and TV stations have refused to invest in coverage of what is most central in the lives of many Americans: religion. Nearly 170 more journalists belong to the Society of Environmental Journalists than the Religion Newswriters Association. One result in 2004 was uninformed writing on the role of religion in American public life.

It's not surprising considering that topflight publications such as U.S. News & World Report, Newsweek and ABC-TV failed to replace religion writers who have departed or have been let go. The shortage of religious reporting in local media makes it difficult for the networks and larger newspapers to hire experienced religious reporters. That is, if they want them. Duin makes the point that no major network, including Fox, has a reporter who regularly covers religion as a beat. It will not surprise many conservatives to learn that in 1994 The Washington Post actually advertised for a religion reporter in November 1994 by saying "the ideal candidate" would be someone who "is not necessarily religious nor an expert in religion."

Many reporters will argue that they do not need to hold a master's degree in business to cover business. I share that sympathy to some degree as a former TV and newspaper reporter who did not finish college. On the local level it may not be that important. However, covering religion in an accurate and unbiased manner for a major media outlet truly is a very complicated matter requiring in-depth knowledge of the tenets and histories of different faiths and an awareness of the experts, their backgrounds and beliefs. It is not a matter for a fledgling local reporter (previously specializing in crime and general reporting) who just joined a national news source. It should be a beat in itself and have knowledgeable reporters.

It's worth noting that even experienced religion reporters would admit that they are bound to make mistakes. Their beat forces them to learn over 4,000 years worth of complicated history. That truth only makes the case more pressing to start breaking in religion reporters at the local level and providing them with the on-the-job training to learn their subject.

Tim Graham, Director of Media Analysis for the Media Research Center, in a 2004 report "Religion on TV News: More Content, Less Context," asserted that television news had failed to cover religion news accurately when it suddenly becomes "hot" as it did last year. At worst the reporters -- who are secular -- have an innate bias against religion. He wrote:

That disconnect between the media elite and the public is especially risky for journalists when religion news is "hot," as it is right now. Even when the amount of religion news increases, the media's tone remains cold, questioning, even hostile. The more traditional or orthodox the religious belief, and the more influential it threatens to become in the culture at large, the more the television networks seem to explain it away, as something "scholars" and "experts" dismiss.

Graham argued that the reporting about the consecration of Gene Robinson, a confirmed homosexual, as an Episcopal Bishop was highly skewed thanks to the journalists' own biases and lack of understanding – or appreciation – for the theologically conservative viewpoint. Graham stated that "the orthodox believer, the observer of Scripture, which clearly decries homosexuality" would understandably not have a favorable view toward Robinson becoming a bishop. They would even view him to be a "false prophet" based on their belief in the Scriptures.

However, CBS "Evening News" reporter Bob McNamara presented the view that traditionalists held toward the liberalizing Episcopal Church "becoming officially all-inclusive to gays is a scriptural gray area these U.S. conservatives vow not to accept." The reason they do not intent to accept it is based upon the Scriptural viewpoint that homosexuality is sinful conduct, not personal opinion. Furthermore, the reporting in this case presented the argument not as one of traditionalists versus liberalizers but conservatives versus "inclusives." Only rarely are "liberals" on theological matters identified whereas theological conservatives must wear the equivalent of a scarlet "C."

The major media outlets also should seek to stop the bias from seeping into their coverage. Graham noted that the networks in their selection of religion experts tilt lopsidedly toward liberal scholars and experts who lack an appreciation for religious orthodoxy. They are presented as true experts without identification as liberals or secularists. It's almost as if a sign is hung in the newsrooms of TV networks, national news magazines and leading newspapers: Orthodox and conservative experts on religion need not apply.

Readers and viewers must start demanding that the major news outlets stop shunting the topic of religion aside except when a scandal breaks. There is much good to report about religion that is simply ignored by the mainstream news media, which discounts religion as any kind of force in the lives of their audience. As Connie Marshner, my former colleague at the Free Congress Foundation, noted, if the mainstream news media had paid attention to the charges made by another Free Congress staff member, Father Enrique Rueda, twenty years ago about the influence of homosexuals within the Catholic Church, you would not have been surprised by the revelations twenty years later that shook the Archdiocese of Boston. Back then, the mainstream news media pretty much ignored what Rueda had reported in his book, The Homosexual Network, only to later seize upon the scandal.

The mainstream newspapers are worrying about declining circulation. On November 1 the Newspaper Association of America reported that during the six-month period culminating on September 30, 2004 circulation declined by 0.9% for daily newspapers and 1.5% for Sunday papers when compared to the same period for 2003. Moreover, the figure may very well be worse considering the reports of inflated circulation figures by several leading newspapers.

At the same time, many people interested in religion are turning to the Internet for their information. The Pew Internet and American Life Project discovered that 64% of 128 million web users check the Internet for news and information about religion. USC Annenberg Online Journalism Review wrote about this trend in a December 2004 article "Religion is Big News on the Internet" and concluded that the seekers of news and information about religion on the Internet represent a large population that is "not…catered to, or understood by the mainstream media. News media generally treat religion either as an aspect of a larger story, like religion in politics, or seasonally [citing a recent Newsweek article about the birth of Christ]. Religion is rarely a story in its own right. ‘As a subject it's a niche subject, not central to the life of a news organization,' said [Pew Project Director Lee] Rainie.'"

Some news organizations are starting to realize the need to change. The Wall Street Journal, for example, has plans to place a reporter on the religion beat. However, it is not enough to simply report about religion -- particularly when it is "hot" as it is now in wake of the 2004 election. It is necessary to have producers, reporters and editors who have an understanding of the tenets of the different faiths within America today and to present an accurate picture of those faiths to their readers and listeners.

"Diversity" in newsrooms has been a top goal for some time within the newspaper industry. However, the fact is that the newsrooms of America are shorn of any kind of real diversity when it comes to religion. The vast majority of editors, reporters and producers in the leading newspapers, news magazines and TV stations are secularists, many of whom lack an appreciation -- much less to say a real understanding -- of the importance of religion in the lives of the majority of Americans. Graham says in his report, "As national journalism organizations publicly declare diversity in the newsroom as a requirement for a balanced reflection of the communities they serve, why is that any less compelling for people of faith than other constituencies in the viewing audience?"

If the news industry of this country were really interested in promoting diversity it would mean placing more emphasis upon religion, hiring reporters who have taken the time to learn their beat, even hiring as journalists graduates of divinity schools and religious studies programs, and insisting upon accurate and truly balanced reporting. Otherwise, the news industry is just handing us a line about their interest in "diversity." The producers, editors and management, who proudly proclaim their commitment to diversity but do not hire knowledgeable religion reporters or ignore covering it altogether, deserve to wear a scarlet "H" for Hypocrisy.

Well, guess what? We don't need to rely upon the major news sources who dismiss the central concern in the lives of millions of Americans, thanks to the rise of cable TV and the Internet.

As the journalist said in the movie Network: We don't have to take it anymore!

Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.

Email the Editor