Coverage of religion falls short

Coverage of religion falls short

But religious groups need to do better job of communicating with media By John Longhurst, Special to the Winnipeg Free Press, June 5, 1996 People who attend church, synagogue or temple may disagree on many aspects of religion, but they almost always agree on one thing—the media do a lousy job of covering the subject. As evidence, they point to what seems to be a preponderance of articles and reports which highlight the negative—scandals, abuse and financial mismanagement. They are also irritated by what seems to be a tendency in the media to report about churches or groups that engage in bizarre practices, on non-Western groups which engage in rites which seem unusual to Canadians.

Another complaint is that when the media do cover religion, reporters seem to know little about the subject. Some reporters can't tell a priest from a pastor and don't know if a Corinthian is a book of the Bible or an ancient architectural support column. If the media assigns reporters to beats such as education, labour, business and sports, why can't more outlets assign reporters to cover religion? Since beat reporters are required to research and understand their area of expertise, this could lead to much better coverage of a subject like religion."

Finally, while many newspapers have some kind of religion page, there's a real lack of intentional coverage by most electronic media. In this regard, television news is the greatest culprit; recently ABC News appointed its first religion reporter, the very first U.S. network to do so. Neither of Canada's two major networks has a reporter assigned to the religion beat, nor do most local TV stations.

As for the religion pages in the newspapers, people who take religion seriously are divided about whether the page is a sign of the paper's high regard for the subject, or just a place to put a few religion items to keep the church advertisers happy. Most people who take their faith seriously are happy to have a page devoted to the subject, but wish reporting about religion could appear throughout the paper.

Why is coverage lacking? One reason is that people in the media who aren't religious don't understand how all-pervasive religion is for believers. Many people in the media see religion as something that happens behind closed doors of churches, synagogues, temples and mosques. It's a private thing, without public consequences. But for people who take their faith seriously it is both intensely personal and vitally public—it influences the way people vote, do business, educate their children and conduct all aspects of their lives. Why are so many parents putting their children in private church schools? Why do some businesses refuse to open on Sundays? Why are some church groups so vehemently opposed to government-sponsored gambling? These are important issues which affect all Winnipeggers, religious or not.

A second reason is that the media fail to appreciate how many people consider religion to be an important part of life. More people go to church in Winnipeg every Sunday than went to a week of Jets games. The Winnipeg yellow pages runs over four pages, with listings for over 400 places of worship. Even people who don't attend church, synagogue, temple or mosque regularly often feel a special attachment to religion.

Another reason for the lack in coverage is that people who take religion seriously almost never communicate their criticism or appreciation to the media. When I do workshops on the subject of religion and the media, I ask participants how many think the media are doing a poor job of reporting about the subject. Almost all hands go up. Then I ask how many have ever sent a letter to the editor or called a station to complain. No hands go up.

The chief way for the media to know if they are doing well or doing poorly is through communication from consumers. But, with a few exceptions, people who take religion seriously seem reluctant to talk to the media about coverage. Perhaps it's because they think the media are predisposed against religion, so complaining won't do any good. Or maybe it's because they think the proper religious attitude is that of quiet forbearance. Whatever the reason, if the media don't get any feedback, there's no reason to change or try to do better.

Moreover, when it comes to the lack of coverage of good stories that involve religion, churches, synagogues, temples and mosques fail to let the media know what's happening. Religion has a great deal to say about issues that face society, such as racism, violence, poverty, sexual abuse, hunger and the environment. But someone has to tell the media about these stories. As one reporter has said, "I'm not divine—someone has to tell me what's going on or I can't report about it." It's no mystery why religious groups which appoint people to do media relations end up with more coverage in the media."

The media play a key role in shaping how Canadians view religion by what they report or what they fail to report. If people who take their faith seriously want to see better coverage, they need to interact with the media. Otherwise, they'll never get the story right.

Return to top