First Person Life


Media Biased Against Christianity?

The following, I think, provides a pretty clear answer.

[SUMMARY: Three stories have come into the popular media this week that have a direct impact on people's view of the voracity of Scripture and the position of Christianity on substantive issues. Two of the three were contrary to Christianity and its teachings, the other was confirmation of the understanding that life does begin at conception.

This post looks at the coverage of these three stories in American Media since they broke earlier this week:

1) 4/4/2006 Babies 24+ weeks after conception feel pain. (hardly any coverage in the U.S.)
2) 4/3/2006-4/4/2006 Jesus walked on Ice not Water. (Significant press and broadcast coverage)
3) 4/5/2006 - Recently found fossil provides missing link between fish and land dwelling animals. (Even more coverage than Jesus walking on Ice instead of water).

All of these stories broke this week. In the final analysis we have two stories which are (at best) based on theory and conjecture and one story which is based on provable scientific data. Which of the three is NOT reported? Of course, the one that is based on FACT.

Note also, of the three stories, two of them attack the voracity of the word of God as revealed in Holy Scriptures and one of them is congruent with the revelation of the World as God has caused it to be written in His Holy Word. Of course, which one isn't reported? The one that is congruent. Which two are splashed all over the "popular press"? The two that attack the Scriptures.

Somehow that burns me more than enough to spend an hour and a half putting together this blog piece. This is utterly disgraceful for a "press" that prides it self on facts and accuracy. In this case, we get no facts --- and thus, accuracy is a null question.

I guess I'll let you decide how "unbiased" the media is... but I think there's a pretty clear specific pattern that emerges from this... Satan is alive and well in the world. The "popular press" is only one of the tools he has under sway.

Click "Full Post" below for more information]

I figured I'd check out with GOOGLE NEWS how many American newspapers have decided to carry the story that REUTERS (and UPI) distributed on April 4 about babies 24 weeks after conception being able to feel pain. You can do the full search yourself, but when I looked at about 1PM today, here's the list.

  • Brocktown News - Not sure what city or state this is in. Their site seems to be a simple aggregation site of some wire stories and not a "real" news organization.
  • Herald News Daily, ND Oddly - has the same page formatting with some slight differences as "Brocktown News" (above). Probably run by the same group. I didn't have much time to check it out.
  • Oberline Times, KS - Uses the same web server as "Brocktown News" (above)... ( - so is obviously run by the same group.
  • Jackson Tribune - Hmm... I'm seeing a definite pattern here with the look and design of the web site's I've seen the article run on so far.
  • Kindred Times - Same as above
  • Ely Times - Ditto
  • MSNBC's Web Site - A somewhat extended Reuters article.
  • ABCNews Wirestory - Same wire story as MSNBC
  • - running a shorter UPI story

    So, we have two major news agencies, Reuters and UPI, with articles written on this subject. We have no mainstream newspapers picking up the story.

    In case the sample from GOOGLE was flawed because of indexing problems, I repeated the search in YAHOO! News. I got the same results... no major US news organization doing anything with this.

    But I realize, space is limited. Maybe there was a more important story... let's look at two other stories that recently hit the news.

    On the same day that it was reported that babies really do feel pain, the story that a University Professor in Florida claims that Jesus walked not on the water as the Gospels report, but on ice was run on the same wires (UPI and Reuters -- I didn't see an AP story, but there probably was one for both stories at somepoint). I must note, however, that articles on this story occurred before April 4. So to be fare, the story isn't quite as new. It apparently broke on 4/3/2006. I didn't research the YAHOO! archives, since there were enough references in GOOGLE alone to prove my point.

    Here's a SAMPLE of the organizations which ran stories:
  • Houston Chronicle
  • USA Today - this is a link to some controversy around this story.
  • Seattle Post Intelligencer
  • NY Times - Ran the story 4/3/2006 - the same day it apparently broke. In fact, even the press releases I found had dates of 4/4/2006.
  • Discovery Channel Web Site - 4/6/2006
  • Kansas City Star - 4/6/2006
  • NY Post - 4/5/2006

    There were others... but this gives you the idea...

    Now, let's look at one more story: Fossilized fish found which "proves" evolution.

    To begin with, I simply do not have enough time to cut and paste all of the links... so again, I will give only a SAMPLE. However, this is a much smaller sample than even the one appearing above.

    This story broke AFTER the story about babies 24 weeks or more after conception feeling pain. Google had 11 pages of references, the MAJORITY from U.S. publications. I didn't even bother looking at Yahoo! Let's see what we have:

  • SF Chronicle
  • Detroit Freepress
  • Chicago Tribune
  • Boston Globe
  • Akron Beach Journal, OH
  • Forbes - multiple updates to the article.
  • Ft Wayne Journal Gazette
  • Tibune Democrate, PA
  • San Luis Obispo Tribune, CA
  • Grand Forks Herald, ND

    In this survey, I attempted to at least filter by headline so that the stories that carried the same headlines (ostensibly from the same wire story) were mostly filtered out. But I think this is an interesting situation. Here's a synopsis of the 3 stories:

    1) A research study which proves scientifically that babies 24 weeks after conception do actually feel pain. This story has existed for 2 full days, has been run on Reuters and UPI and has received next to NO attention in the U.S. press.
    2) A meterological researcher who claims he may have an explanation about how Jesus didn't walk on water but rather walked on ice. [Admittedly, there is controversy surrounding this that doesn't exist with the other, which accounts for some of the additional coverage.] This story gets a large amount of press both written and air-time.
    3) A fossil (the mere existence of which can have multiple interpretations) is said to be the missing link between fish and land dwelling creatures. This story gets a larger amount of press than even Jesus walking on Ice in spite of the fact that it's been around much less time than that story.


    Post a Comment

    Links to this post:

    Create a Link

    << Home