From an interview last week with NBC congressional reporter Luke Russert — son of the widely respected Tim Russert — when asked if he believes the media and larger population has some sort of bias against people of faith:
“I think that’s absolutely accurate, and I think the current world in which we live in, specifically with the American media, snark is valued. [emphasis mine]
And it’s very easy to come after people of faith no matter what their religion is — Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu. That you’re sort of tagged with this label of being puritanical and not understanding of others or of different viewpoints and I think that’s kind of, it’s lazy, number one, and I think it’s just something that just feeds the snickering masses if you will in that regard.
For me, I think issues of faith are very complex. When you cover them as a journalist, you simply can’t, I feel, stereotype somebody as fitting into a box…”
The Intramuralist actually finds Russert’s acknowledgement refreshing. As one within the profession, he articulates what many of us outside have long increasingly sensed.
In all of culture’s efforts to supposedly refrain from being judgmental, many have still justified looking down upon persons whose faith guides their reasoning. Yes, as acknowledged by Russert, a non-religious arrogance has permeated our media; and even more challenging is that such a perspective is then thinly veiled as “news.”
Let’s offer a few actual examples of such “news,” examples in which we will find both agreement and disagreement here on the Intramuralist. It’s not that I share or do not share the below perspectives. My question is how the media presents the perspective…
How does the media handle the perspective of the Catholic business man… who based on his faith, does not believe he should have to provide free contraceptive and reproductive services via Obamacare to his employees?
… Does the media then look down upon his perspective — and air a “news” piece that makes him look foolish and his mandate to comply a wiser, necessary approach?
How does the media handle the perspective of the Washington state florist… who based on her Christian faith, refused to sell flowers to a gay couple for their wedding?
… Does the media then look down upon her perspective — and air a “news” piece that makes her look vindictive and the ACLU’s suit against her a victory for all of humanity?
How does the media handle the perspective of the Methodist man… who based on his faith, is an advocate for collective bargaining and thus supports striking union workers? (Note: collective bargaining is included in “The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church”…)
… Does the media then look down upon his perspective — and air yet another “news” piece that lambasts the man for his outdated, ineffective tactics?
While Russert unveils arguably one of culture’s more current, subtle but significant downfalls, the question is: how does the media’s judgmental approach to persons of faith permeate our news? Have we allowed a pervasive arrogance to be so meticulously morphed into an actual justification of thought, that we no longer recognize the judgment when it seeps into what is supposed to be an objective broadcast?
If the media and larger population look down upon reasoning which stems from spiritual thinking, by definition, that’s arrogance. I wonder, also, then, if we justify and allow the arrogance based on whether we agree or disagree with the perspective.
Trying not to be arrogant in return. Trying even harder not to be snarky.
Respectfully,
AR