Always Hope

Yesterday I wondered aloud if anyone else was feeling bemused by the media frenzy over The News Of The World (of not-so-blessed memory) and its associated publications and personnel.  Apparently not.  The general consensus is that this is one of the most important events this year and deserves every micro-second of media coverage that is being devoted to it. We are told that we live in a new media culture, where the news agenda is set, not by editors sitting in a darkened room somewhere, but by the people, the millions of bloggers and tweeters and whatever who get hold of a story and force the powers that be to take notice.  This is obviously true, and has in many ways increased the transparency and accountability of public life, in this country at least.  The downside of this, though, is that news media tends to be more knee-jerk reactionary than ever, less given to analysis, and dare I say it, more and more likely to initiate huge bandwagons that ever...

The National Secular Society has published its latest outpouring of righteous indignation. The object of wrath this time is the BBC, who have altered their editorial policy , extending a list of controversial subjects that need to be handled with care, to include religion. In practice this seems to mean that editors will not broadcast items that are likely to cause offence to religious groups. Whether religion needs this sort of protection is an interesting question. But the NSS contributes nothing to this debate by putting out a press statement that can be accurately summarised as follows: "it's not FAAAIIIRRRRRR......" In fact this would accurately summarise most of their communiqués. When I first became aware of the NSS and similar organisations, I found them quite threatening, imagining them to be a real danger to the freedom of faith and conscience that we enjoy in this country. But the more I hear of them, the less I can take them seriously. There's a real prob...

The BBC apparently has an editor for arts, science, business, but not for religion .  Some people are quite vexed by this, including Bishop Nigel McCulloch (Manchester), who is the C of E's national spokesman on things to do with the media.  I don't know whether Bishop McCulloch volunteered for the role, or whether he drew it out of the hat at New Bishops' Training Camp, but he certainly gives the impression of being an enthusiast.  There does seem to be a certain repetitive quality about his public statements, though.  Perhaps he has other things to say that the press don't pick up on, but whenever he makes the papers he always seems to be saying the same thing that he is here,  ie. "there should be more religion on telly".   A slight simplification perhaps, but the logic does always seem to come down to the same basic assumptions, namely: 1.  Religious broadcasting is A Good Thing, and in some way is doing us good when we watch ...