In January 1998, Pope John Paul II paid a visit to Cuba. His trip was covered by almost every newspaper, radio and television station on earth. Not only did his central message ‘Don’t be afraid’ inspire thousands of Cubans spiritually and politically, but his visit to the communist republic also led to the release of several political and religious prisoners.

In the same month, but ten years later, an Afghan journalist, Sayed Perwez Kambakhsh, was condemned to capital punishment by a local court for alleged blasphemy. After massive international media attention and protests, the sentence was in March 2009 commuted by a higher court to a twenty-year imprisonment.

Also in 2008, an important Hindu leader in the northern Indian province of Orissa was murdered together with some of his followers, supposedly by Maoist extremists. The event was reported in Indian newspapers, but internationally the murder attracted hardly any media attention. This changed somewhat when Christians in Orissa were accused of being the real murderers. The result was a wave of Hindu violence against the Christian minority in Orissa. Some Western newspapers published news of it, although in brief. In Christian publications, however, the attack on the Orissa Christians was a big issue. In spring 2008, organizers of a Christian festival – Christival – in Bremen, Germany, were forced to call off a workshop on how to cope with homosexuality. Massive protests in the liberal media were behind this. It was feared that the event would be disrupted by protesters from the homosexual lobby.

May I ask you to consider for a moment the similarities and the differences between the four cases mentioned before? What can we learn with respect to the role of the media in matters of religion?

Some Thoughts⤒🔗

In order to help you a little bit with forming your opinion, I want to share with you a few basic, provisional and practical thoughts on this issue, because I think that the ability to deal with the media is of great importance for us as Christians, and especially for those who are involved in Christian organizations.

The Neutrality Claim←⤒🔗

First of all, some remarks in general. ‘Neutral’ media do not exist. The media always represent a certain worldview, even when they claim ‘neutrality’. I do not imagine that this comes as news to you. Nevertheless, it is amazing how often and intensely this neutrality claim is still promoted by many media themselves. It grants them beforehand a certain fancied immunity, which can hardly be challenged. This is especially the case when the challengers belong to a minority group like Christians.

The media constitute a power with their own ideological biases and interests. So they can conflict with the ‘power’ and interests of religion, and surely today they often do. Of course, this is the case in authoritarian states like Belarus and Azerbaijan, where the press is merely an extension of the oppressive regime. But the Western media have their ideological biases too. Most Western societies are dominated by postmodern secularism, which makes religion privatized and marginalized. Anti-religious feelings are common, and religious people are regarded as at least intolerant, and often also as extremist and fundamentalist. Most Western media – though not all – act as the mouthpiece of this secularist approach. They tend to regard religion as a remnant of an ancient past, and at best as a strictly private matter like a hobby club. Intolerance against Christians is increasing, even in countries with a long democratic tradition, and media play a negative role by fueling biases against them.

We may regret this actual situation, but it is wiser and more realistic to accept it as a fact. The most unwise thing we can do is lament the partiality of the media and the fact that most media nowadays ignore the issue of religion and religious freedom. This makes no (practical) sense. The better way is to listen to the advice that Jesus gave his disciples regarding their attitude in a hostile world:

 Be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves.Matthew 10:16

Dealing with the media is pre-eminently a part of the spiritual battle we have to fight. That struggle, according to the instructions of our Lord, is not to be waged by strength and violence. And not by verbal strength either. There is also a pragmatic basis for such behaviour. Screaming and yelling have mostly proven to be counterproductive. And they tend to incite the same manners on ‘the other side’. Or worse.

Meanwhile, I must add that the media spectrum is not always as dreadful for religious people as outlined above. It is true that uninformed, biased media are often guilty of misrepresentation of religion, and that they do work to set back religious freedom. But there are also religiously literate, fair-minded media that can work to extend religious freedom. It is important that actions to promote this freedom seek alliances with these media and their journalists first and foremost.

Trying to be Relevant←⤒🔗

At first sight, the best way to try to gain media attention for religion and religious organizations and their cause seems to be to work for them. In some Western countries, young people are trained at Christian colleges to become journalists. They try to get a position in the secular media and contribute to reducing ignorance about religion by providing relevant and accurate information to their media, obviating stereotypes and caricatured impressions. In this way, they seek to re-establish the legitimate position of religion in the public domain by standing up for the fundamental right of freedom of expression, and by unmasking secular thinking as a life view that has no obvious advantages above other convictions or beliefs.

Well, that is quite a sentence! I mean: in a journalist’s working life this idealistic situation is hardly ever reached. First of all, because most Christian journalists in secular media work in departments that have little to do with religion. But in addition, some (or many?) graduates of Christian journalistic colleges after a while become conformed to the requirements and culture of the medium they are working for, and tend to forget the relevance of their Christian convictions for their daily job. I do not want to blame them too much for that, because the ‘secular’ pressure in such media companies is often extremely high. But what I do want to stress is this: let us be realistic about the importance of Christians working in the secular media for the sake of religion.

Perhaps we may have higher expectations of attempts to influence the media from outside. It is very important to make clear how relevant it is for journalists to have at least some knowledge of religion, because so many situations and conflicts in this world can only be explained from religious roots or motives.

This lack of knowledge regarding religion is enormous. This applies not only to the Christian faith, but also to other religions, especially Islam. Most media, including those known as quality media, have a huge blind spot on this point. In my own country, some secular media after 9 / 11 became aware of their lack of knowledge in this field. Suddenly religion turned out not to be as dead as they had assumed. Interestingly, the social relevance of my own newspaper Nederlands Dagblad has greatly increased since then. Until then we were often ignored by the other media; now we are regarded as a valued source of information on religion and moral values, and we are being quoted in other media frequently.

Persuade Journalists←⤒🔗

To persuade journalists of the relevance of religion is a primary task for Christians who seek media attention for religious matters. When this is accepted, the second thing is to convince them that religion as a model of explanation requires knowledge, and that you can provide that. The way in which you try to do that is important. At this point, a Dutch proverb is applicable which says: “Niet het vele is goed, maar het goede is veel”. Translated into ‘Dutch’ English it sounds like, “Not much is good, but good is much”, or perhaps better: “Enough is as good as a feast”.

What I mean is that we must use the proper opportunities to deliver news items or comments, and that we should not bomb the media with an endless flow of detailed information. This especially applies to the information about persecuted Christians that is delivered by respectable organizations, but sometimes in such large quantities that it is set aside by editors before it is even read. The news that you would like to get published must be relevant. First of all for the editor who receives your stuff, but subsequently especially for his readers. Why was the pope’s visit to Cuba picked up by so much of the media? Because he, being the head of a big international organization and an internationally renowned public figure representing certain values, brought himself through his visit into confrontation with a well-known communist regime representing quite contrary values. That is thrilling. That’s news.

Why have the media paid so much attention to the case of the Afghan journalist who was sentenced to death? Because of the extremity of the judgment; because of the Sharia background to it, which we in the West are so afraid of; because the judgment confirms our darkest suspicions with regard to Islam; because ‘our’ soldiers are fighting in this country for democratic rules; because he is a journalist. In brief: because the case has, at least to a certain extent, to do with ourselves.

The opposite is exactly the reason why the violence against Christians in Orissa, India was so greatly ignored by the average media. When two religious ‘sects’ combat each other because of apparently religious differences, how does this affect modern post-religious westerners? Let them fight it out. The evaluation of the relevance of the case would have been radically changed had it turned out that one or more of the murdered Christians were British or American citizens, for instance. Compare the murder of a German missionary in Eastern Turkey. It is as cynical as that. You can complain about it, but I think it is more realistic to take this reality into consideration. This means that one ‘case’ is more suitable to ‘use’ for exposing the fate of believers in this world than the other.

Be wise in the way you act toward those who are not believers, making good use of every opportunity you have.Col. 4:5, Good News Bible 1992

Fighting for your own Rights and those of Others←⤒🔗

Coming to the various attacks from secularists and adherents of other religions on Christians in the world, it is important to expose the totalitarian aspects of the different worldviews behind them. I think that Christians – journalists, lawyers, and other specialists – should endeavor to unmask the casualness with which these worldviews claim a factual monopoly. Why? Because it is inconsistent with the core values of democratic society. This also applies to Secularism, being a philosophy of life too, a ‘belief’ if you like, and as such it has in a democracy no more rights than other ideologies or beliefs.

Rather than crying blue murder, Christians should first of all look at this problem soberly. In some cases, a brief look at one’s legal rights can be enough not to be perplexed by the claims of secular or other fundamentalists. My impression is that most quality media are inclined to give opportunity for calmly argued contributions in which these rights are explained.

But, if necessary, going to court must not be avoided. Like Paul, who before the authorities appealed to his Roman citizenship and its inherent rights. This can also deliver a good prospect of attracting media attention in favor of religious freedom.

In particular, the freedom of expression is a basic right worth fighting for, because other rights – like the freedom of religion and of press – more or less arise out of it. The focus of this fight should not only have regard to your own interests and for your ‘own use’, but also for that of others.

When it comes to shared concerns, it is preferable to look around for co-belligerents: non-Christians, Muslims or even atheists. Remember the case of British evangelicals fighting shoulder to shoulder with artist Rowan Atkinson (‘Mr Bean’) in order to get a proposed Bill to combat religious hatred rejected by the British Parliament.

What you should not do←⤒🔗

In closing, I’d like to make a few remarks about what we should not do.

First of all: when it comes to using the media, Christians should be aware of Jesus’ wise exhortation to treat others the same way they wish to be treated themselves. This is especially important for Christian newspapers and other media; likewise for missionary and human rights organizations, and for anyone involved in the struggle for religious freedom in this world. In the case of persecuted adherents of other religions, even when it comes to odd groups like the Unification Church or Scientologists, whenever they are the victims of persecution, we should stand for their right to be who they are. To cite the famous expression of Voltaire:

Though I may consider your opinion to be as despicable as can be, I will defend your right to express it.

Secondly: fair coverage does not necessarily equate to positive coverage of a religious group. What I mean is this. Christians themselves can be guilty of infringement of their religious freedom and of persecution. Some organizations and missionaries lack wisdom and cultural sensitivity when they ‘enter’ a new mission field, for instance by using words like ‘crusade’ and ‘claiming territory’. This might create panic and fear amongst the adherents of other faiths. Fair coverage in these cases means that this approach is not whitewashed or neglected.

A great responsibility rests upon the shoulders of Christians who are involved in promoting the Christian faith in public life. Remember that persecution is only the end of a long process. It always begins with disinformation. Therefore, monitoring the media – in Western countries as well as elsewhere in the world – is extremely important. It has often been observed that the violence against Christians in Indonesia and India could have been forestalled if in the years and months beforehand the media in those countries had been closely monitored, and media in other parts of the world had been ‘fed’ with quality information.

Media people are only as good as the sources they have. Christians should be such good sources.