Journalism

, , , , , ,

What's the one thing journalists need to learn from the Christianity Today firestorm?

, , , , , ,

Let’s consider this an educational moment. Since journalists are paying lots of attention, right now, to Christianity Today and other things linked to the late Billy Graham, let’s do a flashback to some poll numbers published in the fall of 2018.

This polling was done by the Billy Graham Center Institute at Wheaton College, working with LifeWay Research. One of the goals was to understand why evangelicals voted the way that they did in 2016.

Lots of things grabbed my attention, but here are some numbers that I think journalists need to ponder at the moment in light of the recent CT editorial by departing editor Mark Galli. You may have heard about it. The headline proclaimed: “Trump Should Be Removed from Office.”

But back to CT in 2018. The bytes that jumped out at me:

* Only half of the evangelicals polled voted for the candidate that they truly wanted to support in the White House race.

* One out of three said that they voted AGAINST Hillary Clinton or AGAINST Donald Trump.

* One in four white evangelicals said that they voted AGAINST Trump. One in three black evangelicals said the same thing.

* At least 20% of evangelicals didn’t vote (and I’ve seen figures as high as 40% elsewhere).

Put it all together and a high percentage — 77% in this poll — of white evangelicals did said that they voted for Trump. However, echoing earlier CT reporting, only about half of them said that they wanted to do so.

I wrote a national column about that with this headline: “Complex realities behind that ‘81 percent of evangelicals love Trump’ media myth.” Here’s how it ended:

Waves of news about this 81 percent vote have “created a simplistic, negative caricature of who evangelicals are, right now,” said Ed Stetzer, director of the Billy Graham Center. “It allows lazy people to keep saying that all of those evangelicals are ‘all in’ for Donald Trump. ... They’re trying to turn Trump voters into Trump.

”Trump voters are not Trump, and that’s certainly true for most evangelicals.”

So what’s the Big Idea that journalists need to learn from all of this, including the Galli editorial?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , ,

Who would Jesus cheer for? S.C. paper explores the evangelical ties of Dabo Swinney’s Clemson Tigers

, , , ,

The College Football Playoff games are this weekend.

My No. 4 Oklahoma Sooners (12-1) are two-touchdown underdogs to the No. 1 LSU Tigers (13-0). But OU coach Lincoln Riley said, “We are going to go ahead and show up.” So, friends, feel free to go ahead and pray for a miracle!

In the other semifinal, the No. 3 Clemson Tigers (13-0 and defending national champions) face the No. 2 Ohio State Buckeyes (13-0).

In advance of Clemson’s fifth straight CFP appearance, the Post and Courier of Charleston, S.C., wrote about “How Dabo Swinney’s Christian evangelism boosts Clemson recruiting.”

The piece opens this way:

CLEMSON — The journey from high school football stardom to Clemson passed through NewSpring Church for some of Dabo Swinney’s latest recruits. Visits started not in the head coach’s office or the Tigers’ $55 million training facility that includes a bowling alley and miniature golf course, but in a church parking lot 2 miles away.

Cars parked, players and their families then boarded a shuttle to the facility, where, many say, God’s presence was clear. 

“Before we do anything, we’re going to pray,” said Sergio Allen, a highly rated linebacker from Fort Valley, Ga., who signed Wednesday as part of Clemson’s No. 1-ranked recruiting class.  “Somebody’s going to pray, whether it be coach Swinney, one of the staff members, another coach. It might even be us. We’re going to pray.”

Swinney, an evangelical Christian, is reluctant to elaborate with reporters about his faith; he declined an interview request for this story. But in the moments after Clemson’s 44-16 win over Alabama in the College Football Playoff national championship game Jan. 7,  he made a bold statement in front of a global audience.

“We beat Notre Dame and Alabama. We left no doubt. And we walk off this field tonight as the first 15-0 team in college football history,” he said. “All the credit, all the glory, goes to the good Lord.”

For those paying attention, the faith emphasis of Swinney and his team isn’t exactly breaking news.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Friday Five: CT's editorial, LDS church's $100 billion, Catholic priests, SBC sex abuse, holiday grief

, , , , , , , ,

Did you hear about the editor-in-chief of a leading evangelical magazine calling Donald Trump unfit to lead the nation?

But enough about the editorial that Marvin Olasky and World magazine wrote before the 2016 presidential election.

Christianity Today broke the internet — or at least crashed its own website — with retiring editor-in-chief Mark Galli’s editorial Thursday making the case for Trump’s removal from office.

Washington Post religion writer Sarah Pulliam Bailey, a former online editor at CT, tweeted that her mouth “dropped open” when Galli’s piece hit the World Wide Web.

Me? I was about as surprised as I could be without actually being surprised.

As The Atlantic’s Emma Green noted:

Within hours of the article’s publication, the magazine’s website had crashed and Galli had been invited to speak on CNN and NPR, among other outlets. To be clear, Galli’s editorial in no way signals that evangelicals are about to defect, en masse, from Trump or the Republican Party. Christianity Today, also known as CT, mostly appeals to well-educated readers who are moderate in every way, including politically and theologically. Much of its readership is international, and many older print subscribers might not even register the small, seismic event that just happened on CT’s website. And polling over the past few months has consistently shown that white evangelicals remain among Trump’s staunchest supporters.

And at the New York Times, Elizabeth Dias pointed out:

The editorial was a surprising move for a publication that has generally avoided jumping into bitter partisan battles. But it was unlikely to signal a significant change in Mr. Trump’s core support; the magazine has long represented more centrist thought, and popular evangelical leaders with large followings continue to rally behind the president.

More later.

But for now, let’s dive into the Friday Five:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

A Pew Research Center study on the varying lengths of sermons in Christian churches? That'll preach

, , , , ,

When’s the last time you read a news story on sermon lengths?

Before this week, I mean?

If you follow religion news, you know that the Pew Research Center released a study Monday dubbed “The Digital Pulpit” and analyzing sermons in various Christian contexts.

It’s a fascinating topic, actually.

It’s also one that I don’t recall ever making headlines before. Of course, journalists get in trouble by making statements like that. So please feel free to educate me on past coverage if I missed it. That’s what the comment box is for.

From the Pew report, here is a rundown of the approach:

This process produced a database containing the transcribed texts of 49,719 sermons shared online by 6,431 churches and delivered between April 7 and June 1, 2019, a period that included Easter.2 These churches are not representative of all houses of worship or even of all Christian churches in the U.S.; they make up just a small percentage of the estimated 350,000-plus religious congregations nationwide. Compared with U.S. congregations as a whole, the churches with sermons included in the dataset are more likely to be in urban areas and tend to have larger-than-average congregations (see the Methodology for full details).

The median sermon scraped from congregational websites is 37 minutes long. But there are striking differences in the typical length of a sermon in each of the four major Christian traditions analyzed in this report: Catholic, evangelical Protestant, mainline Protestant and historically black Protestant.3

Catholic sermons are the shortest, at a median of just 14 minutes, compared with 25 minutes for sermons in mainline Protestant congregations and 39 minutes in evangelical Protestant congregations. Historically black Protestant churches have the longest sermons by far: a median of 54 minutes, more than triple the length of the median Catholic homily posted online during the Easter study period.

Both the Washington Post’s Sarah Pulliam Bailey and The Associated Press’ David Crary produced interesting news stories on the study. The New York Times’ Elizabeth Dias did a quick item on the study, asking for reader input for a possible future story.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Attention reporters: New poll examines trends among 'Catholic voters' heading into '20 elections

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

With less than a year before the 2020 presidential election, a new poll of U.S. Catholics found that they largely favor a host of Democratic challengers to President Donald Trump.

But the survey also found that 58% of devout Catholics, those who say they accept all church teaching, were “sure to vote” for Trump next year — compared to 34% of all Catholics and 32% of respondents overall who were asked the same question.

The survey — conducted in cooperation between the Eternal World Television Network and RealClear Opinion Research — offers updated insights into the minds of American Catholics ahead of the upcoming Democratic primaries and the November general election. 

“With few exceptions, for generations, tracking the preferences of the Catholic vote has proven to be a shortcut to predicting the winner of the popular vote — and I expect 2020 to be no different,” said John Della Volpe, director of the poll. “Like the rest of America, the 22% of the electorate comprising the Catholic vote is nuanced and diverse. And like America, the diverse viewpoints based on generation, race, and ethnicity are significant and prove that no longer are Catholic voters a monolith.”

There’ s also the notion of who exactly are these Catholic voters who support Trump? Here at GetReligion, tmatt has argued — quoting a veteran priest in Washington, D.C. — that there are actually four types of Catholic voters in America: Ex-Catholics, Cultural Catholics, Sunday-morning Catholics and “sweats the details and goes to Confession” Catholics. The poll doesn’t dig into any of these factors.

Since the days of John F. Kennedy, Democrats who are also Catholic have tried to reconcile the church’s teachings with their party’s politics.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

The Washington Post's long quest to explain Buttigieg's race problem while ignoring religion

, , , , ,

The Washington Post had a front-page story this week on Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg’s “long quest to bridge racial gap,” as the print headline put it.

The online title: “Inside Pete Buttigieg’s years-long, and often clumsy, quest to understand the black experience.”

You get the idea.

According to the Post article, the surprise 2020 contender’s struggle to connect with African Americans goes back to his college days.

Even though the piece tops 3,000 words — a novel in the world of newspapers — one crucial factor is hardly mentioned. Given that this is GetReligion, it probably won’t take you long to guess what.

If you’ll forgive me for sounding like a broken record, I’ll refer back to a post I wrote earlier this month asking, “Serious question: Is Buttigieg being gay a reason for his low support among black voters in the South?”

In that post, I noted:

The stories get into poverty and other crucial issues, but I’m going to focus on a specific point raised in all three articles: the connection, if any, between Buttigieg’s sexual orientation and his low support among black voters in the Bible Belt.

I keep waiting for a major newspaper reporter (perhaps a Godbeat pro is available?) to explore that question. So far, it hasn’t happened. Or if it has, I missed it (in which case I’d welcome a link).

As for the Post story, it offers some interesting anecdotes on Buttigieg’s life experiences with African Americans, opening with his time as an intern for a black reporter in Chicago:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

CNN's religion editor delves into Salvation Army's effort to change its 'anti-LGBTQ' reputation

, , , , ,

“As Chick-fil-A capitulates, should press characterize Salvation Army and FCA as anti-LGBTQ?”

That was the title on a post I wrote last month after news broke that Chick-fil-A would stop donating to certain groups deemed anti-gay, including the Salvation Army.

Chick-fil-A’s decision has continued to make headlines since then, including an interesting story last week in World magazine. The evangelical news publication noted that despite the recent severed ties, most of the fast-food chicken chain’s charitable giving still goes to Christian ministries.

The chicken sandwich brouhaha is a part — but not the whole, um, chicken enchilada — of a big report out today by CNN Religion Editor Daniel Burke.

Instead, Burke focuses on the bigger issue of the Salvation Army and its effort to change its “'anti-LGBTQ” reputation, as CNN describes it:

(CNN) Salvation Army bell ringers, the folks you see jingling bells by red kettles at Christmastime, will be carrying a new prop this year: A card explaining the Christian church and charity's approach to LGBTQ people.

Designed to help bell ringers answer questions from passersby, the cards include a link to online testimonials from LGBTQ people helped by the Salvation Army's array of social services, from homeless shelters to rehab clinics and food pantries.

"For years, Facebook posts, forwarded emails and rumors have been leading some people to believe the Salvation Army does not serve members of the LGBTQ community," the cards read. "These accusations are simply not true."

To many Americans, the Army's social services may be far more familiar than its politics or theology. Ranked number two in the Chronicle of Philanthropy's list of "America's Favorite Charities," it raised $1.5 billion in donations last year. The Red Kettle campaign began 129 years ago, when a Salvationist put out a pot for the needy on Market Street in San Francisco.

But to some in the LGBTQ community, the Salvation Army has another reputation. For decades, they've accused Salvationsts of denying some services to same-sex couples, advocating against gay rights and adhering to a traditional theology that considers gay sex sinful. At times, LGBTQ activists have dropped fake dollar bills or vouchers protesting the Salvation Army in the red kettles.

First off, kudos to Burke for noting way up high that the Salvation Army is a church as well as a charity. Many people don’t know that.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: Why does GetReligion want to keep doing that journalism thing that we do?

, , , , , , , , , , ,

I have never really enjoyed listening to infomercials, to tell you the truth. But, like it or not, creating one of those was a small part of the agenda in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in).

Yes, host Todd Wilken and I talked about GetReligion’s upcoming move to the Overby Center at the University of Mississippi, where I will also be a senior fellow linked to events focusing on religion, news and politics. I announced that in a post the other day with this headline: “Religion news, the First Amendment and BBQ: GetReligion will soon have a new home base.” And, yes, we talked about the fact that GetReligion needs to raise some money in order to do what we do in the future.

However, I think it’s significant how we got to that topic. We started off talking about the doctrinal wars over LGBTQ rights at George Fox University, which was addressed in this post: “Here we go again (again): RNS/AP offers doctrine-free take on George Fox LGBTQ battles.”

Readers can tell, just from that headline, that this story linked into many familiar GetReligion themes, including the crucial role that doctrine — whether academics call it “doctrine” or not — plays in defining life on private-school campuses, both on the left and the right. All to often (think “Kellerism”), journalists report and edit these stories as if journalists are in charge of determining what is “good” doctrine and what is “bad” doctrine.

There’s no need for an accurate, fair-minded debate when you already know who is right and who is wrong. Here’s a bit of that George Fox post:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

If the byline says Sarah Pulliam Bailey, go ahead and count on an interesting, enlightening religion story

, , , , , ,

Since I started writing for GetReligion nearly 10 years ago, I’ve cranked out probably 1,500 posts for this journalism-focused website.

Now, I have about 10 or 11 posts left before I transition to a new role with Religion Unplugged starting Jan. 1. If GR’s downsizing is news to you, be sure to check out tmatt’s post from Wednesday on his appointment as a senior fellow at Ole Miss’ Overby Center for Southern Journalism and Politics and the plans for GR moving forward.

The impending changes have made me a bit nostalgic. When I started at GR, my fellow contributors included Mollie Hemingway, now a conservative media star frequently retweeted by the president of the United States, and Sarah Pulliam Bailey, now an award-winning religion writer for the Washington Post. (Both are incredible human beings, by the way, just like all the contributors I’ve had an opportunity to know at GR.)

At GR, my role has been to analyze mainstream news coverage of religion and offer constructive tips for improvement. That has been tricky to do where Bailey is concerned because (1) she is a friend and former colleague and (2) she is a pro’s pro who doesn’t leave much room for criticism.

I’ve always wished we had a better way here at GR to just say: Hey, here is this really cool piece of religion journalism, and you ought to take the time to read it.

Actually, that’s what I’m about to say about Bailey’s piece this week on a Washington, D.C.-area pastor who confessed he’s tired and plans to take a sabbatical.

Yes, I could have said that way up top, but it wouldn’t have filled an entire post. And for a little bit longer, I have a quota to reach. (Thank you, by the way, to tmatt for putting up with me and my weird sense of humor all these years!)

Bailey’s story opens with this compelling scene:


Please respect our Commenting Policy