Rolling Stone

'Naughty' list mass media: Should religious leaders help parents fight screen culture?

'Naughty' list mass media: Should religious leaders help parents fight screen culture?

Parents in pews rarely turn to Rolling Stone for advice about pop-culture morality.

But the magazine's expose about "The Idol," a summer HBO series about a romance between a pop starlet and an edgy cult leader, produced waves of viral quotes. Production staffers called it a "rape fantasy" that verged on "sexual torture porn." One said the series about a young woman "finding herself sexually" evolved into "a show about a man who gets to abuse this woman, and she loves it."

The network cancelled "The Idol," even though a public-relations statement cited "strong audience response" to "one of HBO's most provocative" dramas.

Thus, HBO landed on the Parents Television and Media Council "naughty list" for 2023. The citation noted: "HBO has led the charge towards marketing explicit, adult content to children and teens, introducing the sexually explicit The Idol to viewers this past summer, quietly adding Naked Attraction featuring uncensored fully naked contestants, and extending teen-targeted Euphoria for another season of drugs and depravity."

National Public Radio hailed "Euphoria" as "thrilling, daring, disquieting and compelling," as well as "a parent's worst nightmare" with its focus on high-school students who have "problems handling an excess of drugs, drink and sex" and "always seem to make the worst choices."

While stressing that PTMC is secular, it's obvious that today's digital screen culture -- delivered through smartphones, tablets, laptops and, every now and then, televisions -- is raising issues that religious leaders cannot ignore, said Melissa Henson, the organization's programming director.

"Unquestionably, COVID accelerated a shift in media consumption patterns. … We're not talking about the end of traditional television, but there is no question that the audience is becoming more and more fragmented," said Henson, in a telephone interview.

"This is making it harder for parents to be aware of what their children are watching, of course. Also, the online world isn't controlled by the kinds of forces that affected TV or even cable TV, such as the desires of advertisers."


Please respect our Commenting Policy

When it comes to Speaker Mike Johnson, some journalists have become unhinged

When it comes to Speaker Mike Johnson, some journalists have become unhinged

Much to the rejoicing of the American populace, the House of Representatives got back to work Oct. 25 when the Republicans finally agreed on a speaker after an agonizing three weeks with no one in charge.

But to read media reports about the new speaker, you’d think the Rev. Jerry Falwell had risen from the dead and was occupying the spot. There’s an evangelical Christian at the podium and that’s red meat for a lot of scribes out there.

Watch the above video and listen to the two anchors scoff at the very idea of monitoring your kid’s internet content. Imagine, they said, being concerned about whether your son is watching porn!

It’s hard not to listen to such repartee without one’s mouth falling open. Youth suicides are soaring; kids are watching stuff online and carrying it out and these folks just think it’s all so ridiculous. I know the parents of a 13-year-old who was into really dark stuff online. By the time they figured out what he was up to, it was too late. They found his body in the garage.

A lot of America does believe in monitoring their kids’ internet viewing, porn included; a concept that some of the media I’ll be discussing cannot comprehend. Some of the most unhinged coverage has come from the Rolling Stone and finally backlash over the Stone’s over-the-top coverage is starting to emerge. More on that in a moment.

At the base of the media hysterics is the news about a father/son arrangement between Johnson and his 17-year-old son, to use a shared software program to make sure the other hasn’t been looking at porn. My prize for the most faux rage headline comes from the New Republic:

Mike Johnson and His Son Monitoring Each Other’s Porn Intake Is Worse Than You Think

The House speaker admitted to a wild new detail about his personal life. And it’s a bigger deal than it seems.

 First off, this headline is deceptive. What Johnson has said is not that the two of them are perusing dark websites on the sly; the point is neither of them are looking at porn at all.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Rolling Stone readers will be shocked: Flamy Grant's cock-and-bull tale of oppression

Rolling Stone readers will be shocked: Flamy Grant's cock-and-bull tale of oppression

Ethan Millman of Rolling Stone had an amusing story on his hands, if ideology had not prevailed and rendered it into an uncritical public relations piece.

The story is this: The Recording Academy changed the category of the album “Bible Belt Baby by Flamy Grant from Contemporary Christian Album to Best Pop Vocal Album. Millman reports that the change was the result of vulgarities in the song “Esther, Ruth, and Rahab,” which includes this line: “God would only hear a prayer/If it came from a person with a cock.”

Millman quotes this statement from the Recording Academy that confirms its reason for making the change: “Re-categorizing recordings with explicit language/content has been a standard practice for the Gospel & CCM genre committee, given that the Gospel & CCM Field consists of lyrics-based categories that reflect a Christian worldview.”

And that’s the point when the detachment of traditional journalism concludes. I am sure that is shocking to Rolling Stone readers.

The rest of the story hands the microphone to Matthew Blake (the offstage name of Flamy Grant), who has a sense of humor about a great many things other than his victimization narrative. In this story, his word is printed as gospel.

First Blake complains about the category change — one that most purveyors of Contemporary Christian Music would welcome, given the genre’s reputation as being bland and dull.

But Blake believes the change “completely buried me” because, as Millman explains, Blake would “now be measured against the likes of the world’s biggest superstars as opposed to a smaller niche of peers from the Christian music community.”

Next, Blake presents as a naif in the woods of Big Music: “This is all so new to me; I’m pretty clueless about the inner workings of the music industry.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: God knows, there's more to rising tensions in country music than politics

Podcast: God knows, there's more to rising tensions in country music than politics

Gentle readers, here is the GetReligion question for this week.

Here we go: Who would you trust to know more about the complex cultural, moral, religious and, yes, political world of country music — the editors of Rolling Stone magazine or the late, great Johnny Cash?

I asked this question during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in), which focused on a Rolling Stone feature with this headline: “The Culture Wars Are Tearing the Close-Knit Country Music Community Apart.”

To cut to the chase, these country music fights are all about politics — of course. And also, it’s totally new (#NOT) for country stars to speak out on issues of culture, morality, family, politics, economics, race, etc. Forget that Hank Williams guy, Jimmie Rodgers, Merle Haggard, Loretta Lynn and lots of other superstars.

People like Cash. It helps to read this next quote slowly and imagine the Man in Black’s voice-of-God singing and speaking tones

:… When asked to describe his musical values, Cash preached country gospel: "I love songs about horses, railroads, land, judgment day, family, hard times, whiskey, courtship, marriage, adultery, separation, murder, war, prison, rambling, damnation, home, salvation, death, pride, humor, piety, rebellion, patriotism, larceny, determination, tragedy, rowdiness, heartbreak and love. And mother. And God."

Yes. there’s some politics in there — along with some other important topics.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Time to dig into World Religions 101: Does Vivek Ramaswamy's Hinduism shape his politics?

Time to dig into World Religions 101: Does Vivek Ramaswamy's Hinduism shape his politics?

Vivek Ramaswamy — and his Hindu background — is the hot new flavor in religion reporting this week, with pieces coming out in Rolling Stone and Religion News Service. The New York Times did a piece earlier in July.

Yet, the outlet asking the best questions on this relevant topic may be Globely, a website that tracks international news. We will get to that in a moment. Ramaswamy

For those of you who don’t yet know, Ramaswamy is running for president — the second Hindu to do so since Tulsi Gabbard ran in 2020. In terms of interviewing actual Hindus, RNS came out on top.

Their numbers in this country are about 1% of the populace — 3 million maybe — and they are overwhelmingly first-generation immigrants, educated and majority male. According to this Pew Research data, they aren’t particularly observant religiously and they tend to be well-off.  

Let’s dig in.

First, a gripe: As someone who’s studied the false, independent Christian prophets who swore up and down that Donald Trump would be re-elected president in 2020, it’s beyond annoying when publications choose those folks to represent the beliefs of mainstream Christianity.

Not only did RNS do this in Monday’s story, but sadly, Rolling Stone does the same in their recent story.

Quoting Omaha, Neb., pastor Hank Kunneman — one of the prophets who got it wrong — and applying terms like “Christian nationalist” to anyone to the right of President Joe Biden is giving a big megaphone to this extreme wing of Christianity.

Rolling Stone proclaims:

VIVEK RAMASWAMY IS getting a hard look by Republicans willing to entertain alternatives to Donald Trump, especially as Ron DeSantis continues to flounder. The 37-year-old biotech entrepreneur has surged into third place in several national polls, ahead of prominent Republicans like Mike Pence, Nikki Haley, and Tim Scott.

Ramaswamy is also a practicing Hindu, and though he has been campaigning as an anti-abortion religious conservative, his non-Christian faith is a major stumbling block for many in the GOP’s evangelical base. He’s been on a charm offensive with these evangelical audiences, but the outreach appears to be backfiring, at least among the Christian nationalist set.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: What role did God-talk play in Tucker Carlson's fall at Fox News? Good question

Podcast: What role did God-talk play in Tucker Carlson's fall at Fox News? Good question

Rod “Live Not By Lies” Dreher has shared the following anecdote many times, but it’s especially interesting that he used it, once again, in this Substack post: “Tucker Fired Because Of Religion.”

I am using it to open this podcast post because this week’s “Crossroads” discussion (CLICK HERE to tune that in) isn’t really about Tucker Carlson’s forced exit from Fox News — it’s about whether Carlson was a very good fit with the Fox News political and cultural worldview in the first place.

My theory is that Carlson is a conservative populist — as opposed to being a D.C. Beltway Republican — and that his religious beliefs (especially after he stopped drinking) are part of that mix. This created tension with the dominant Fox News management culture, which is rooted in the Page 3 Libertarian Republican beliefs of titan Rupert Murdoch and the network’s original mastermind, the now disgraced Roger Ailes.

This brings me back to Dreher’s anecdote:

I have long wondered why Fox News doesn’t have much religious reporting, or cover things including a religious angle, even though many of their loyal viewers are religious. Now I know. And you should know too. You might recall my telling the story about how the freelancers Fox hired to cover the 2002 Catholic bishops’ meeting in Dallas, the first one after the scandal broke, asked me to brief them on who the players were, and what the issues were. They took copious notes, but when I told them about the homosexual clerical networks, and their roles in the scandal, they told me to stop. “Orders from the top of the network: stay away from that stuff,” I was told. I told them that you couldn’t understand the scandal without that factor. Maybe so, they said, but we are ordered not to touch it.

Thus, Dreher argues that Carlson’s forced exit should open the eyes of Fox News-hooked religious and cultural conservatives.

Whatever Rupert Murdoch’s internal motivations, the fact is — well, to be precise, what I confidently believe to be the truth — that Tucker Carlson gave an extraordinary speech about the theological aspect of the cultural crisis we are enduring. He talked bluntly, to an audience at Washington’s leading conservative think tank, about the fundamentally spiritual nature of the fights we’re in. And he encouraged his audience to pray for our country.

Several days later, he was fired.

As you would expect, this brings us to the much-discussed Vanity Fair feature that ran with a headline proclaiming, “Tucker Carlson’s Prayer Talk May Have Led to Fox News Ouster: “That Stuff Freaks Rupert Out.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New stories on New Apostolic Reformation, Sean Feucht keep assuming a right-wing takeover

New stories on New Apostolic Reformation, Sean Feucht keep assuming a right-wing takeover

I’ve been complaining for years that journalists aren’t schooling themselves adequately on the prophetic movement (among charismatics) that some call the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). Since the Jan. 6 uprising, they’ve started writing about it.

But be careful what you wish for. Not all that glitters is gold. I’ve read more than a few stories that sound like something out of a horror flick: An ominous theocratic movement involving millions of people, under uber-controlling leaders with a few White Christian nationalists thrown in.

The two pieces I’ll be addressing is Elle Hardy’s Aug. 23 story in The New Republic: “The Right-Wing Christian Sect Plotting a Political Takeover,” and Rolling Stone’s July 11 story on Sean Feucht. Both typify current Christian trends as scary movements with an end game of sending Donald Trump to the White House in 2024 and sending America back to the Middle Ages.

Hardy’s story had ambitious goals. It began with a summation of this movement starting from 1994 with a revival at a church once known as the Toronto Airport Vineyard. Also known as a “laughing revival” for the odd laughing fits folks had, it made major changes in North American Christianity and swept across the English-speaking world. (Three years later, I was interviewing folks in Iceland who said they were dramatically influenced by Canadian missionaries spreading its benefits.)

All this grew into the NAR, the author says, and (drum roll):

And they have one clear goal in mind — ruling over the United States and, eventually, the world.

NAR, as it’s often called, is a shadowy movement, rather than an organization; many who are considered a part of it deny that it even exists. Broadly, it seeks to return church structures to the fivefold ministry of the Bible (defined roles of apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, and teacher). The key roles in this pecking order are prophets, who have the visions, and apostles, the anointed ones who put ideas and networks into practice and, critically, to whom everyone else must submit.

OK. I did my first master’s thesis (in 1992) on authority and submission practices in the charismatic communities that were so popular among evangelicals in the 1960s and 1970s, plus I wrote a 2009 book that deals substantially with this issue. And I can tell you that the NAR folks did learn a thing or two about the mess caused by the 1970s “discipleship movement” which was deeply into one submitting oneself to an elder who was himself (usually this person was male) submitted to a higher elder in a hierarchical line reaching up to a small group of people.

They’re not going that same route today.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Fringe Trump-style conservatives propose a HUGE legal rewrite on religion in public life

Fringe Trump-style conservatives propose a HUGE legal rewrite on religion in public life

All but overshadowed by the U.S. Supreme Court’s dramatic elimination of nationalized abortion rights, the just-concluded term was vital in terms of how the Constitution applies to religion.

There were moments of unity. The Court’s liberals joined emphatic rulings that Boston must allow the Christian flag to be shown on the same terms as other displays, and that a death-row inmate is entitled to religious ministrations.

But then there were two highly contentious rulings, both in June. The high Court said a football coach is free to openly pray on the field after games and that a Maine program must include sectarian high schools if it pays tuition for other non-public campuses. That second decision explicitly erased key doctrine on what constitutes an “establishment of religion” that the Constitution forbids.

The current Court has become “exceedingly accommodating of people’s religious views,” and is “blowing a hole in the wall between church and state,” summarized the displeased New Yorker magazine.

Reporters should be watching one conservative faction’s hope for more radical renovation on the “establishment” clause. The Religion Guy learned about this, of all places, in a June 28 Rolling Stone item about the friend-of-the-court brief filed in the football prayer case, Kennedy v. Bremerton, by the group America First Legal. AFL became a player in the political litigation game only last year.

Where to begin? Repeat after me: “incorporation” and “disincorporation.”

No, not the formation and dissolution of a business, but an extremely important and often overlooked doctrine in Constitutional law. Simply put, the Supreme Court has extended the rights guaranteed in the First Amendment to cover all the states because — believe it not — the U.S. Constitution as written involved only the federal government.

The first incorporation decision was in the 1925 Gitlow case, when it required New York State to recognize freedom of speech, followed by the Near case (Minnesota, press freedom, 1931), De Jonge (Oregon, freedom of assembly, 1937) and Edwards (South Carolina, petitioning government, 1963).


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Return of 'nuns' growing weed: A Rolling Stone puff piece on this emerging religious group

Return of 'nuns' growing weed: A Rolling Stone puff piece on this emerging religious group

Those PR-friendly, pot-puffing Sisters of the Valley are back. I’m sure that this is shocking news (#NOT) to readers who know anything about the history of this group.

Here’s a GetReligion flashback. Some reporters struggled, in early happy talk features about this group, to make it clear these “sisters” were not, in fact, some progressive Catholic order. One classic piece inspired a blog post by Catholic Deacon Greg Kandra — a CBS News professional in his career before moving to the altar — with this classic headline: “Newsweek, Go Home. You’re Drunk. Those Aren’t Nuns.

Now we have an update about the Sisters of the Valley in, logically enough, Rolling Stone. Here’s the double-decker headline on that:

Our Ladies of the Perpetual High

How a New Age order of feminist nuns is reimagining spiritual devotion and trying to heal the world — one joint at a time

Yes, some headline writers cannot resist “Our Lady” jokes, which is unfortunate. However, the second part of that headline is clear about the contents of this feature, which helps readers know what is what and who is who. This clarity is what makes this story worth reading.

Before we get to that, let me remind readers of a key point in that “thinker” that ran here at GetReligion last weekend: “Two think pieces on changes in American religious life, with a few political twists.” One of the pieces that I recommended was a Rod “Live Not By Lies” Dreher post pointing to a new blast of information from the Pew Research Center team.

Forget politics for a moment. The headline on Rod’s post — “Christianity Declines — But Not ‘Spirituality’ — is what connects that Pew data to this new Rolling Stone feature. Dreher wants to note a renewed surge in a tend that has been around for decades (think “Sheilaism”). Here is a key passage:

America continues to transition to its post-Christian reality. … One of the most interesting, and unexpected, developments is that in the US, relatively few of these people who are falling away from Christianity are becoming atheists. Rather, they are cobbling together a bespoke bricolage religion, one designed just for them.


Please respect our Commenting Policy