RSS Feed
Mass Media? Diverse Media, Diverse Treatments of Faith
As I read through some of my fellow panelists' comments on this question, I found myself nodding in agreement--perhaps especially with points made by Susan Jacoby, Mike Otterson, the Rev. Thomas Reese, and Bishop N.T. Wright--people I've spoken with at some point or whose works I've read and whom I respect. To say the obvious, each of them stands at a very different theological/philosophical location on the map of human experience, each site with its own history and heroes. I wouldn't try to fit those widely differing traditions into a single box. Somewhat similarly, I can't do that with the vast universe called the "mass media."
A bit like religion and spirituality in America, the media are highly diverse, and so continually changing that I've never found myself in a group of people who can quite agree on what the boundaries of "media" are.
I know what I think of when I hear the word--newspapers, and really only a few particular newspapers. Yes, that's the Old Media, a fragment of an ever-expanding universe that also takes in Hollywood, magazines, radio, network television, cable, Internet sites, the blogosphere (where we are now), maybe even instant messaging.
To circle back, such diversity puts me in mind of why William James refused to try to define religion itself when he delivered the Gifford lectures more than a century ago: "... let us rather admit freely at the outset that we may very likely find no one essence, but many characters which may alternately be equally important to religion."
How is religion/spirituality/faith treated within this web of overlapping media systems? With everything from particular reverence (just turn on your radio when you're driving at night) to satire. Sure, there's disdain, too, but I'd argue that there's a lot less of that than some might imagine, especially here in the United States.
Bottom line, I think what many of us on this panel (and in the culture at large) would like in the public treatment of religion is an approach that's intelligent, informative, even provocative. Sometimes we actually do get that.
Some years back, a Roman Catholic priest with years of experience living in Hollywood and interacting with "the industry" told me that some of the best movies he ever saw might never mention God's name except in vain; what made them so "religious," he said, was that they treated the human condition with moral seriousness. I thought of him this past weekend, while listening to public radio report about a folksinger, a "religious skeptic," who had turned to writing a version of gospel music to try to understand the experiences of church-going America.
Here lies another challenge: what I may perceive as "religious" may seem resoundingly secular--even disrespectfully irreligious--to someone else. To which I say, see James, quoted above.
By
Gustav Niebuhr
|
April 2, 2007; 1:55 PM ET
| Category:
Spirituality
Share This: 
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Pagans, Witches and Media |
Next: Digging for Bones No Way to Find Jesus
Posted by: garyd | April 7, 2007 12:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Old media is not controlled by just a few people. Only someone who doesn't work in the media or know much about it would say that. There are more newspapers than in just the half dozen major cities, you know. And there are many, many, many small chains or just family owned papers. MANY!
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2007 2:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Don't even try to read that hoax-buster website; it could truly make you insane. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The guy who wrote it is obviously a nutcase, and not an authority of any sort. You might just find him as another member of the Jesus Seminar soon...
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2007 9:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I agree that the media *appears* diverse - as in there are many types of media. It is, however, managed by only a few corporations.
And if you compare Major U.S. cities to other world cities, the U.S. cities pale in comparison to them. Take Mumbai, in India. They have at least twelve different daily newspapers - all independently owned.
FOr bgone's statement, it's interesting to read it in conjunction with the previous post. bgone stated that NBC and CBS believe that the bible is the word of god, just after anonymous finished saying that those two media outlets are owned by Jewish men.
Posted by: sparrow | April 3, 2007 6:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
What I see in the media is mostly neglect and apathy towards regligion. However, when it is mentioned it's usually negative (abusive catholic priests, evils of mega-churches, high profile leaders falling...).
***********************************
An aside to BGONE...
Wow...that is some serious academic research there (the hoax website). Did the author's 3-grader make those illustrations? Seriously.
I also doubt that NBC, ABC, and CBS concur that the Bible is the word of God.
Posted by: Shawn B. | April 3, 2007 2:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
BGone, you are wrong. The mainstream media does not "believe" that the Bible is the word of God, only acknowledges that many of their viewers and readers think so. By the way, if God himself does not exist, why do you concern yourself with what he could or could not have spoken or written? I do agree that there is not anywhere near enough diversity in the realm of public information. There is a bias on both d=sides in favor of celebrity worship, poorly proved arguments and ad hominem attacks.
Posted by: Viejita del oeste | April 3, 2007 2:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
mass heart and mass tongue.
the mass culture and mass media of society is the same.
the mass culture in the western society is based on 4:
1-ot
2-nt
3-philosophy and mythology of greco-roman.
4-science and technology of the time.
ot and nt donot exceed the boundry of the church ,because they donot have life system.
although the majority of the mass people of the western society are belivers ,but their actual life practice is securalism.,the best of securalism brought to the mass public liberalism and captialism,the mass buck culture and its mass tongue the mass media.
so in real life the religion that is being doctornized and ritualized in the western society is the religion of the buck and its mass tongue that it reach and preach day and night for the mass public.
scholars of religion as well as the mass public need to seriously sit down and examine and test their back ground ,if not, the buck will keep floating over morality and virtues.
Posted by: mo | April 3, 2007 2:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment
For example, "700 Club" has an almost different slant on religion as compred to CBS, NBC and ABC to say nothing of FOX. All agree on one thing, the Bible is the word of God.
The Bible is a proved hoax, http://www.hoax-buster.org so they're all wrong. That's how things have been for a long time. Many can and have looked back and seen the mistake of embracing the hoax in the past but few are capable of realizing the gravity of embracing it now.
Posted by: BGone | April 2, 2007 6:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"A bit like religion and spirituality in America, the media are highly diverse"
You have to be kidding me!
Diversity a la Zell, who just bought the LA Times, Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other local TV stations and daily newspapers.
What about NBC which owns Universal pictures or the Time Warner (CNN, WB, and Warner Bros pictures) or how about Fox media etc.
There is no diversity in media aside from 5 or so major corporations. They control local, national news, magazines, newspapers and the motion picture industry. And of course we should never dare mention that the majority are Jewish men. Zucker - nbc, Meyers - WB, Redstone - MTV, Moonves - CBS, Geffen - Dreamworks, Grey - Universal. etc. etc. etc.
If you believe there is "diversity" in media then you are a fool.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 2, 2007 5:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
Remember the theory that if you let 100 monkeys type long enough youeventually get a copy of a Shakespearean play? Well someone is apparently trying it. They haven't got Shakespear yet but they did get www.hoax-busters.org