Home ›

Culture and Media Institute

Printer-friendly version Send to friend

Perhaps the Media is Just Covering What Republicans are Talking About

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on December 13, 2011 - 2:43pm

Last week, the Culture and Media Institute released a report entitled "Baptism by Fire" which complained that media outlets were covering the faith issues as they relate to the Republican primary battle in a different manner then it was covered during the Democratic primary battle in 2008:

With the 2012 elections less than a year away, the liberal media are attacking President Obama's potential opponents on a number of fronts, but especially on religion.

ABC, CBS and NBC have used religion in two ways, either painting the field of GOP primary challengers as a God Squad of religious zealots or playing up differences in their faith. Whether they're letting viewers know that "Rick Perry's gonna have to answer some questions about the people" he prays with, fretting that God "told Michele Bachmann," to enter politics, or devoting no less than 40 segments to the question of whether Mormonism is "a cult" or if "Mitt Romney is a Christian," the networks have repeatedly used faith against the GOP field.

Media preoccupation with the GOP candidates' faith is the exact opposite of how they covered (or didn't) candidate Obama's 20-year attendance at the church of a racist, anti-American pastor who subscribed to "black liberation theology," or Obama's half-Muslim heritage.

The Media Research Center's Culture and Media Institute studied network news reporting on the GOP candidates and religion from Jan. 1-Oct. 31, 2011, and compared it to coverage of the Democratic presidential primary candidates over the same period in 2007. The discrepancy, in both the amount and tone of the coverage, was striking. Network reporters, so disinterested in the beliefs of Obama and his rivals for the 2008 nomination, took every opportunity to inject religion into their coverage of the GOP field.

The obvious response to this allegation would be to point out that the media probably writes a lot more about the faith of Republican candidates because Republicans candidates regularly use their faith as part of their campaigns.

After all, Rick Perry just released two ads about his faith and organized a massive public prayer rally earlier this year, while Michele Bachmann was just on James Dobson's radio program talking about the importance of a "biblical worldview."  For his part, Newt Gingrich regularly uses his faith as part of his campaign while Mitt Romeny's Mormonism continues to be an issue to various Religious Right activists.  In fact, just last month, most of the Republican contenders gathered for a "Thanksgiving Family Forum" hosted by several Religious Right groups where they spent several hours discussing nothing but their faith.

So the reason the press writes more about the faith of Republican candidates probably has a lot to do with the fact that Republican candidates make faith a large part of their campaigns ... but admitting that would pretty much undermine the entire premise of CMI's report, which is why, when CMI's Matt Philbin was on The Janet Mefferd Program yesterday and she raised this rather obvious point, he struggled to explain that it was still a double standard because Democrats are "supposedly" just as religious as Republicans:

Mefferd: Now I wonder if that fact that you have a number of GOP hopefuls who are very, you know, open about their faith - you have Michele Bachmann, you have Rick Perry, you have Herman Cain (you have Herman Cain,) you have Mitt Romney - could it be construed that faith is more of an issue in this election because they are more candidates talking about it?

Philbin: Well, in any GOP primary battle, they do talk about it more, certainly, then Democrats do. In Iowa, they're going to evangelical conservatives and they certainly are not going to be reticent about their faith. But the problem is that the Democrats are, supposedly, just as religious, they have a need to appeal to almost the very same people, so for the networks not to cover the religion of the Democrats while they are covering the religion of the Republicans is a strange double standard.

One of CMI's recommendations in this report is that "reporters should refrain from injecting religion where it doesn't belong" ... but apparently reporters should also be writing a lot about the faith views of Democratic candidates even if those views tend not to play nearly as prominent a role in their campaigns as compared to Republicans. 

PFAW
Filed under:

MRC: Too Many Gays Are On TV!

Submitted by Brian Tashman on August 4, 2011 - 10:06am

The Media Research Center’s Culture and Media Institute (CMI) is out with a new report blasting the recent report by GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, on LGBT media representation. GLAAD reviewed television programming hours to measure “on-screen inclusion of LGBT representations.” Irate, the CMI contends that LGBT characters are actually over-represented in television programming, calling it a “distortion of reality.”

This won’t be the first time the MRC and its CMI affiliate attacked positive representations of the LGBT community in the media. MRC head Brent Bozell went on a tirade against the shows Glee and Degrassi for employing “gay propaganda,” and the CMI repeatedly targeted J.Crew for having a gay model and for promoting a nail polish line made by the designer whose young son wears nail polish on his toes.

Note to TV networks: Don't even think about downsizing the disproportionate airtime you give gay characters and issues. The bean-counters at GLAAD are watching.

…

But the near-ubiquity of homosexual characters on television flies in the face of demographic reality. Current studies indicate that the homosexual population in the United States is around 2 to 4 percent. The Williams Institute's (which the Huffington Post called the "Brookings Institution" of the gay rights movement) demographer-in-residence Gary Gates estimated that about 4 percent of the US population is gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender (he estimates that 1.7 percent of the U.S. population is gay or lesbian, 1.8 percent are bisexual, and .3 percent are transgender).

But GLAAD has good reason to reward TV's distortion of reality. GLAAD's own report states that "Of the 19% who reported that their feelings toward gay and lesbian people have become more favorable over the past 5 years, 34% cited 'seeing gay or lesbian characters on television' as a contributing factor." GLAAD's acting president, Mike Thompson, crowed that, "As television audiences get to know our community and the common ground that we all share on the screen and in their own lives, acceptance is growing."

And also, the mistaken notion that homosexuality is widespread in America is growing. An April Gallup poll revealed that more than half of Americans believed that the homosexual population in America is over 20 percent. The poll cited entertainment as a possible factor, declaring that "This [poll] suggests Americans have had even more exposure to gays and lesbians, be it in their personal lives or through entertainment or other means."

So if it seems that you can't flip through the channels today without running across gay characters or story lines, you're right. You can't. And GLAAD's there to make sure of it.

PFAW
Filed under:

MRC Lashes Out At J. Crew For Using Gay Model

Submitted by Brian Tashman on May 4, 2011 - 11:34am

Last April the Media Research Council’s Culture and Media Institute attacked J. Crew for using “blatant propaganda celebrating transgendered children” because one of its products advertised a designer who painted her son’s toenails. Fox News eventually picked up the story and warned of the ad’s perilous consequences for children. Now, the CMI is going after J. Crew once again, this time for featuring a gay employee as a model in its May catalog. Dubbing the clothing store “Gay Crew,” the CMI exhorts that “there’s more to company’s LGBT agenda than pink nail polish”:

When you're right, you're right. Last month, the Culture and Media Institute reported that internet marketing material from preppie clothing maker J. Crew featured a photo of the company's president painting the toenails of her young son hot pink.

"Lucky for me I ended up with a boy whose favorite color is pink," said the photo's caption. "Toenail painting is way more fun in neon."

CMI pointed out that the gender-bending ad was a nod to the gay agenda. Fox News picked up the story and a media storm ensued. Liberals scoffed at social conservatives' concerns that J. Crew was exploiting and normalizing the feminization of the boy with 'blatant propaganda.'

But according to ABC News.com, CMI was onto something. A May 2, 2011, online story places 'J. Crew at Center of Gay Economics With Openly Gay Model.' The company's May 2011 catalog 'features employees as models, including a gay designer with his boyfriend, who are described as 'Happy Together.''

…

Now, J. Crew seems to have jumped on the bandwagon, according to advertising experts.

So J. Crew is consciously angling for the 'LGBT' market, but there's no agenda behind marketing materials featuring a little boy with hot pink toenails?

PFAW
Filed under:

MRC's Latest Target: J.Crew

Submitted by Brian Tashman on April 8, 2011 - 1:45pm

While the Media Research Council says it is “dedicated to correcting the media's anti-free enterprise biased reports,” it draws the line at defending products which feature “blatant propaganda celebrating transgendered children.” The MRC’s Culture and Media Institute, which works to protect “morals against the assault of the liberal media elite,” is incensed that J.Crew is featuring a line of nail polish that advertises the designer’s son wearing nail polish on his toes. According to the far-right group, J.Crew is promoting “liberal, transgender, identity politics,” and the designer is “exploiting” and manipulating her son:

J.CREW, a popular preppy woman's clothing brand and favorite affordable line of first lady Michelle Obama, is targeting a new demographic - mothers of gender-confused young boys. At least, that's the impression given by a new marketing piece that features blatant propaganda celebrating transgendered children.

An email sent to customers on Tuesday, April 5th contained a promotion for free shipping if the customer spends $150 or more. The email also contained a feature called 'Jenna's favorites,' highlighting special selections by J.CREW designer Jenna Lyons. Jenna selected a striped long-sleeve t-shirt, and hot pink nail polish by Essie, modeled by her young son.

In the feature, Jenna is pictured with her adorable curly-haired son Beckett, and the two are seen giggling with Jenna holding Beckett's feet, containing hot pink painted toe-nails. 'Lucky for me, I ended up with a boy whose favorite color is pink,' read Jenna's quote. 'Toenail painting is way more fun in neon.'

Not only is Beckett likely to change his favorite color as early as tomorrow, Jenna's indulgence (or encouragement) could make life hard for the boy in the future. J.CREW, known for its tasteful and modest clothing, apparently does not mind exploiting Beckett behind the façade of liberal, transgendered identity politics.

PFAW
Filed under:

Is the Culture and Media Institute No More?

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on December 11, 2008 - 3:09pm

Tips-Q posts this email reporting that Bob Knight and his staff at the Media Research Center's Culture and Media Institute have been laid off: 

We need Bob Knight in the pro-family movement!

Bob and his whole department at Media Research Center have been laid off. Please circulate this message in hopes that another position will surface for him and the rest of his terrific staff.

The list of Bob’s stellar accomplishments would take pages and more time than any of us have. He was a reporter with the Los Angeles Times, has held key positions at several conservative think tanks, Family Research Council, and Concerned Women for America. He has been instrumental in the battle to preserve marriage. He has written compelling pieces about the threat to religious liberty of “hate crimes” and ENDA legislation. He has exposed the pseudo-science of the “born gay” claims of homosexual advocates.He has appeared on countless TV and radio shows and always represents our side with truth, humor and grace.

At MRC, Bob’s department has done a terrific job of tracking the bias against Christians and conservatives in the mainstream media.

As we approach one of the darkest times in recent American history, the knowledge and experience of a fine Christian man like Bob Knight is needed more than ever. We understand the tough financial woes of Christian groups, yet a background like his is rare and should not go unutilized.

Please circulate this to all Christian and conservative contacts.

PFAW
Filed under:

The World Congress of Families Chooses Its Destination

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on August 6, 2008 - 8:49am

Every few years, right-wingers from all over the globe gather for the World Congress of Families in order to “affirm that the natural human family is established by the Creator and essential to good society,” share strategy, and urge their governments to adopt policies that “protect and support the family, and not usurp the vital roles it plays in society.”  Not surprisingly, high on their list of priorities is the protection of marriage and families against “pornography, promiscuity, incest or homosexuality”: 

The complementary natures of men and women are physically and psychologically self-evident. These differences are created and natural, not primarily socially constructed. Sexuality is ordered for the procreation of children and the expression of love between husband and wife in the covenant of marriage. Marriage between a man and a woman forms the sole moral context for natural sexual union. Whether through pornography, promiscuity, incest or homosexuality, deviations from these created sexual norms cannot truly satisfy the human spirit. They lead to obsession, remorse, alienation, and disease. Child molesters harm children and no valid legal, psychological or moral justification can be offered for the odious crime of pedophilia. Culture and society should encourage standards of sexual morality that support and enhance family life.

So where is the next World Congress of Families going to be held, you ask?  Of all places, Amsterdam:

Last week, the Selection Committee for World Congress of Families V met in Washington, D.C. and unanimously recommended Amsterdam as the site for the next Congress. Their recommendation was accepted by the WCF Management Committee.

If the World Congress of Families sounds like some sort of international version of the sorts of “values voters” events put on in this country by right-wing political groups, that probably has something to do with the fact that many of those same groups are members of the WCF’s various steering committees, with groups like Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, and Concerned Women for America all playing a role:

The 16-member Selection Committee was composed of: Ignacio Arsuaga (HazteOir.org, Spain), Chuck Donovan (Family Research Council), Don Feder (World Congress of Families), Farooq Hassan (Pakistan Family Forum), Jesus Hernandez (The Family Network, Mexico), Marie-Claire Hernandez (Family & Society, Mexico), Randy Hicks (Georgia Family Council), Robert Knight (Culture and Media Institute, Media Research Center), Ewa Kowalewska (Human Life International,  Europe), Gwendolyn Landolt (REAL Women of Canada), Yuri Mantilla (Focus on the Family), Dorothy Patterson (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary), Austin Ruse (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), Mary Ellen Smoot, Jennifer Swim (GFC Foundation) and Father Jaroslaw Szymczak (Institute of Family Studies, Poland). The meeting was chaired by Gwen Landolt (Real Women of Canada).

...

The Management Committee, which has ultimate oversight of the Congress, consists of Carlson, Janice Crouse (Senior Fellow, Beverly LaHaye Institute, Concerned Women for America), Paul Mero (President, Sutherland Institute), William Saunders (Senior Fellow & Human Rights Counsel, Family Research Council) and Christine Vollmer (President, Latin American Alliance for Families).

When the event was held last year in Poland, members of the European Parliamentary Working Group on Separation of Religion and Politics were not particularly jazzed that right-wing advocates were preparing to use the nation as a staging ground for saving Europe and the rest of the world from the “demographic winter and … the secularists.”

But the group soldiered on, despite the opposition. As Robert Knight of the Media Research Center put it: 

This is a nation that has suffered enormously over many decades. First from Nazism and then communism. They're a tough bunch of people who appear to have the strength to resist especially the homosexual agenda. If you've been victim of communists and Nazis, you're not going to run in fright from the forces from San Francisco.

PFAW
Filed under:

Poll Shows Nefarious Gay Plot Succeeding

Submitted by Anonymous on July 25, 2007 - 11:16am

As recently interpreted by Focus on the Family and the Culture and Media Institute, polls judging attitudes toward equal workplace rights demonstrate that the American people are a bunch of suckers:

According to Gallup, 90 percent of Americans believe gay people should have equal workplace rights, but only 47 percent think being gay is “morally acceptable.” To bridge the gap, the gay strategy is to spotlight themselves as credible and professional, and provide business leadership with gay-friendly misinformation.

“The bottom line is they are using the power of money and position to promote an agenda that these people acknowledge that half of Americans still feel is immoral,” Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Media Institute in Alexandria, Va., told Family News in Focus.

Apparently, this “gap” couldn’t have stemmed from the American public’s ability to develop nuanced views with regard to ideas of equality and their own personal moral convictions... No, the gap must have come from a successful disinformation campaign that somehow managed to fool the public into believing that gay people can be capable workplace employees.

PFAW
Filed under:
Syndicate content