If the Church is Divided, Blame the Fake News Media

It’s no secret that the American church is deeply divided — especially over politics. Instead of pointing fingers at each other for the division, however, it’s time we name the elephant in the room: America’s corporate media.

That elephant loomed large during the first presidential debate between incumbent VP Kamala Harris and rival Donald Trump, with most post-debate commentary ignoring the candidates and dissecting their one-eyed moderators from ABC News.

Every American who tuned in witnessed David Muir and Linsey Davis join forces with Ms Harris for a three-on-one show trial against the Bad Orange Man.

Trump was “fact-checked” at every turn, even if the “fact checks” were fake. (Yes, even ABC News has since conceded that abortion-to-birth is legal in at least nine states, and at least eight babies have died after failed abortions under the governorship of Kamala’s running mate in Minnesota).

On the flip side, Kamala was not fact-checked for her fibs even once. (No, Donald Trump did not call neo-Nazis “very fine people,” nor did he invoke a “bloodbath” if he loses the election. And yes, Kamala did urge Americans to post bail for rioters in Minneapolis.)

Footage from tonight's fair, unbiased debate: pic.twitter.com/c6LeGsEv0Y

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) September 11, 2024

While both candidates made a similar number of false or contestable claims on the night, Trump was fact-checked four times and pressed for follow-up on six occasions, while Kamala was let off scot-free on both counts.

In sporting terms, it’s not so much that the referees were biased or even paid off. More accurately, two players from the opposing team pulled on referee jerseys and only blew the whistle when it helped their side.

It would be a breathtaking understatement to call America’s press ‘unfair’ or ‘lopsided’. Words like ‘devious’, ‘manipulative’ and ‘subversive’ are much more accurate.

It is a well-established fact that American newsrooms are crowded with liberal coastal elites who live in a different world from most of their readers, creating a media echo chamber. This phenomenon accelerated in 2020, when outlets like the New York Times, The Intercept, Vox, the Philadelphia Inquirer and Variety gagged and even expelled prominent journalists for failing to uphold a narrowing set of political viewpoints.

It wasn’t always this way.

The freedom of the press is a pillar of democracy. Without a free press, governments cannot be properly held to account, and this allows tyranny to take root unchallenged.

What many in the modern world have forgotten is that our Western democracies (or republics, in the case of America) were originally Christian projects. Many of their features can be traced back to the Bible.

The free press is one example of a formerly Christian institution. The role of the media in holding governments to account has a precedent in ancient Israel, where prophets were called to hold Israel’s leaders accountable without fear or favour. This meant giving God’s affirmation when a leader did what was right, or providing sharp rebuke when they acted unjustly.

Since their founding, nations like the United States had a built-in trust that the press would carry out its function by holding each successive government to account, regardless of its political leaning.

All this was only possible because Western cultures enjoyed a strong Christian consensus, the byproduct being a belief that truth is objective. Therefore the media’s role was to tell the truth as objectively as possible. That never happened perfectly, of course, but the media nevertheless demanded far greater levels of public confidence than it does today.

However, as our Christian consensus has withered and postmodernism has flourished in its place, truth is increasingly seen as relative. Today’s crop of editors and journalists swam in a sea of postmodernism at college. As a result, they are much more likely to see journalism as a way to express their own views as “truth” and thereby shape public opinion.

Here’s the rub: Still today, many Christians naively look to the old guard media as though it were performing the same function it always has done — namely, demanding equal accountability from both sides of the political divide.

So when Kamala’s cheer squad pulls on the black-and-white striped jersey for a presidential debate, half of the American church stares at the uniform without questioning the act of deception that has just taken place.

Or to press the Old Testament analogy further, a parade of false prophets are assuring Americans that their judgments of the nation’s leaders are entirely fair, and far too many Christians believe them.

Like Israel’s false prophets, the mainstream media today demands the nation’s trust but has traded truth for their own opinions.

The great Francis Schaeffer warned of this as early as 1977: “When the perspective and the worldview of the elite coincides with some of the influential news carriers — it does not have to be all — then either consciously or unconsciously, the media becomes an instrument for manipulation.”

We are right to hope for an institution with the resources and integrity to hold our political leaders to account without bias or agenda.

But the simple fact is that this is no longer happening.

When it comes to politics at least, we must listen to legacy media outlets as though they were seeking to influence our views and our vote — because they are.

When a leader favoured by the press is in office, we can expect fluff pieces, fanfare, and low levels of account keeping. When a leader disliked by the press is in power, we must realise that every word and action will likely be scrutinised in an endless search for flaws and failures. This is not fair — but it is fact.

Former Rolling Stone journalist Matt Taibbi (a liberal), is among those calling out this favouritism — a phenomenon he labels the Sovietisation of the American Press. He explains that coverage of Democrat leaders “increasingly resembles official press releases, often featuring embarrassing, Soviet-style contortions.”

In other words, when Americans open a newspaper or switch on the news in 2024, they are not merely reading the press. They are consuming propaganda. They are devouring Pravda.

If the church is politically divided, it is divided between those who believe the propaganda and those who have rejected it.

A divided church is a weak church. The growing political rift among God’s people is hurting friendships, families, congregations and whole denominations, as believers disagree on how Christian concerns should best be voiced in the public square and at the ballot box.

What’s the answer?

Our political formation needs to be taking place in our churches, not on the internet or cable TV. We shouldn’t merely be asking how to approach secular entertainment like a Christian — we need to ask, “How do I consume mainstream news like a Christian?”

Like the believers in Martin Luther’s day who had for too long given their unquestioning trust to a corrupt church, countless Christians today continue to consider the legacy media worthy of their trust on political matters. Sadly, they are misguided.

If this stronghold can be broken, I believe we will see far greater unity in the body of Christ.