The new year has scarcely begun, but Americans watching television have already heard a lot about God.
When Larry King interviewed George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton the other night, CNN presented ample split-screen evidence that the Lord transcends political parties and backgrounds. The former presidents -- blue-blooded Yankee and hardscrabble Arkansan -- spoke eloquently about faith. By now, perhaps no subject has achieved more agreement in the USA's news media. Faith in God is a televised no-brainer.
"My faith is never shaken by a personal tragedy," said ex-President Bush, "or even a tragedy of this enormity." Clinton said: "It reminds us that we're not in control, that our faith is constantly tested by circumstances, but it should be deepened when we see the courageous response people are having, and the determination to endure." Both men praised the incumbent in the White House, presumptively a God-loving guy.
But, writing in the London-based Guardian four days into the new year, George Monbiot did the unholy math: "The U.S. government has so far pledged $350 million to the victims of the tsunami - and has spent $148 billion on the war in Iraq. The war has been running for 656 days. This means that the money pledged for the tsunami disaster by the United States is the equivalent of one and a half day's spending in Iraq." (The British government's killing-to-helping ratio, while not quite so extreme, is also overwhelmingly for death.)
In the media frame, it doesn't seem to matter that almost all the notable Americans invited on the networks to talk about their faith in God are supportive of bankrolling the carnage in Iraq. This is nothing new. For a long time, high-profile talk about belief in God has been a useful fog for agendas that enrich weapons manufacturers while helping the wealthy get wealthier and further impoverishing the already poor.
In autumn 1994, just weeks before the mid-term election when the GOP won the upper hand on Capitol Hill, the executive director of the conservative fundamentalist Christian Coalition spoke at the National Press Club. "Faith in God isn't what's wrong with America," Ralph Reed declared, "it's what is right with America." A decade later, Reed is one of the nation's top Republican operatives, and such rhetoric is routine.
No doubt many Americans like the profuse media talk about faith in God. If that's the case, they should say so -- and, judging from the steady media cacophony, a large number of them do. But what about the Americans who find that talk to be cloying, simplistic and manipulative? Whereís the media space for them?
One of the great media taboos is to sincerely question "faith in God" or to suggest that the superficial renditions of faith popularized in mass media are apt to paralyze more than empower.
With all the God talk, big media outlets create ongoing pressure for conformity. That may seem to be an affirmation of shared beliefs or, at worst, inconsequential. But banishing doubt runs the very real risk of banishing -- or at least ostracizing -- thought.
"I don't know if God exists and I don't care," Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn wrote a few days ago, bucking the media tide. "God's will and design for this temporal and spatial vastness, if any, is so patently, deliberately impenetrable that I doubt any mortal has a grasp on it. The very inexplicability of sad events like the tsunami, like the AIDS crisis or even like the cancer death of the father of one of my daughter's 2nd-grade classmates last week are, to me, reminders to focus on our obligations to one another, not to the infinite; to honor the creator, if any, by honoring creation itself and hoping that's good enough."
But the media market is bullish on piety -- and very fond of the facile reverence that far-flung TV correspondents are now exuding from picturesque beaches struck by Acts of God. We don't need to impugn the sincerity of any individual to note that such reportage is good for the U.S. news business. And, in the political economy of corporate media compassion, it would be bad for the U.S. news business to devote anywhere near such extensive coverage to the children being destroyed by Pentagon firepower and wartime malnutrition in Iraq.
We're often told that God works in mysterious ways. But Washington's priorities are appreciably more intelligible. While the prospects for clearly deciphering life's unfathomable riddles remain dim, we ought to figure out how to stop the wholesale killers who've gained so much unholy power close to home.
Welcome to Dogma Alert. Our mission is to critically examine, dissect and publish news reports dealing with the monotheistic religions and their psychological grip on the suggestible minds of true believers around the globe. Heaven help us all.
This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to
advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific,
and social justice issues, etc.
US LAW
We believe that our use of any such copyrighted material constitutes a 'fair use' as provided for
in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material
on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
EU LAW
As regards the use of copyrighted material within the European Union. The European Directive 2001/29/EC
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of
copyright and related rights in the information society provides in its art. 5 an exhaustive list of
exemptions that can be implemented by the Member States.
Amongst that list, the exemption(s) invoked must cover the reproduction and communication to the public
(since the publication on the Internet implies those two acts). Generally, exemptions will be based on
the purpose of the intended use. For instance, the Directive provides for an exemption to the exclusive
right of reproduction and communication to the public when it is made for the sole purpose of illustration
for teaching or scientific research, as long as the source, including the author's name, is indicated,
unless this turns out to be impossible and to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved.
Another exemption is âreproduction by the press, communication to the public or making available of published
articles on current economic, political or religious topics or of broadcast works or other subject-matter of
the same character, in cases where such use is not expressly reserved, and as long as the source, including
the author's name, is indicated, or use of works or other subject-matter in connection with the reporting of
current events, to the extent justified by the informatory purpose and as long as the source, including the
author's name, is indicated, unless this turns out to be impossibleâ.
All the exceptions must comply with the three step test which imply that exemptions must only apply in certain
special cases (1) which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter (2)
and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightholder (3).
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use',
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home