Reporting On Religion: A Balancing Act In Polarizing Times

Reporting On Religion: A Balancing Act In Polarizing Times January 14, 2025

Journalists are silhouetted against the sky.
Balance and fairness are the salt and pepper of good journalism. | Photo by Nikita Kotrelev

At the end of 2024, members of the Religion News Association named the re-election of Donald Trump, along with other dynamics and demographics related to the election, the top domestic U.S. religion story. They named Israel’s ongoing war against Hamas in Gaza the top international religion story of the year.

These storylines are ongoing, sure to continue capturing headlines and causing conflict in 2025 and beyond. And “religious rhetoric,” Whitney Phillips at the University of Oregon wrote, “is likely to suffuse” these stories – along with much of the media landscape – in 2025.

As outgoing president of the Religion News Association and Editor of ReligionLink — a premier resource for journalists writing on religion — I’ve spent time thinking about what religion reporters write about and how it’s best done.

Looking back on my 14 years on the beat, and looking ahead to the role of news media in shaping perceptions of faith in the politically charged times we have ahead of us, I believe religion reporters have the opportunity to approach the next year with “curiosity” — as The New Yorker’s Emma Green put it — and recommit to the balance, accuracy and insight that best characterizes our beat.

Balance

Balance and fairness are the salt and pepper of good journalism.

Of course, news coverage can often err by representing the extremes or only the most mainstream spectrum of perspectives. There are also the pitfalls of “false balance” or “false equivalence,” representing opposing points of view when the facts are well-known and widely accepted.

In polarized times, the question of balance has come under stiff criticism. Numerous outlets and organizations purporting to be balanced and fair are, in truth, far from impartial and lean hard into a particular political or social point of view. Large swathes of various publics have gravitated toward media that do not expose them to alternate positions or challenge their beliefs, creating “echo chambers” that exacerbate existing political fissures and cultural faultlines.

Some journalists have come under attack for acknowledging the other side — or sides — of an argument. Simply quoting an anti-abortion advocate in a story on reproductive rights can solicit serious censure or citing studies and statistics on abuse in atheist communities can invite opprobrium and online attacks.

Religion reporting often involves dealing with extremes. As we wade into conflicts and contentious issues, those of us who cover religion need to not only remain calm and be careful but follow a few general rules.

First, there are almost always two sides to any issue involving faith. Seek out voices beyond those that are loudest and most extreme. Look for sources who offer constructive ways of moving the debate forward — mediators, ethicists and third-party observers. If you need to reference the latest prognostications or quote the usual voices, remember that the majority does not always rule. Minority voices matter, both within one religious community and across the spectrum of faith. So, seek out “people in the pew” and see how many everyday believers and practitioners actually agree — or even care about — the prevailing views and tailor your coverage appropriately.

Second, be careful with labels. Rather than relying on general labels (e.g., pro-life, extremist, liberal, fundamentalist) write about people, practices and communities with specifics. Allow believers and practitioners to characterize their own perspectives and rituals while, at the same time, not allowing them to define or explain the views of those they might be in opposition to.

Third, be inclusive and diverse. When writing about religion, being as inclusive and diverse as possible enriches the story. Try to explore a diverse range of voices according to faith, ethnicity, gender, economics, geography, political persuasion or sexual orientation. In a recent piece, I started with a story about Muslims abstaining from voting in the 2024 U.S. elections. By the end, the story was about a range of people — Anabaptists and Rastafari, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Catholics — who abstain from voting for religious reasons. The result was a richer account of the state of faith and politics in America.

By showing that faith can lead people to different positions — political, religious, ethical — and that others can end up in the same place without the same guiding faith, we challenge the discourse that we live in “two Americas” or that the country is about to tear itself apart.

Accuracy

If balance has come into question, so too has the notion of accuracy. Facts and truth, it seems, are up for grabs in a “post-factual” society.

In an environment where facts are no longer taken as indisputable truths but as “works in progress” at best and bendable according to our respective biases at worst, reporters must be careful to write with rigorous observation and verifiable sources.

There is, as longtime Religion Editor for Newsweek, Kenneth Woodward put it, no substitute for “being there.” As seemingly simple and convenient (not to mention cheaper) it can be to report from home, religion journalists must resist the temptation to become armchair reporters.

When we report from afar or rely on the written accounts and opinions of others without direct contact with the people we are reporting on, we can represent the story from our own vantage point and draw unfair comparisons. This can exacerbate the tendencies and mechanisms of a post-factual society: from confirmation bias to identity protective cognition or politically motivated thinking to the affirmation of our desired conclusions.

In a climate of increased budget cuts and reduced staff, it may seem a pipe dream to demand more on-the-ground reporting. But I believe it is essential if we are to best cover religious individuals, communities and perspectives in the years to come. While digital tools and social networks can augment and amplify our coverage, there is simply no substitute for visiting the mosque that just came under attack, talking to the migrants who carry their faith with them as they cross borders or sitting with and listening to the members of a community many consider a “cult.”

And in addition to fact-checking and verifying our sources — both getting the facts right and getting the right facts — it is important in this day and age to provide transparency about sourcing whenever possible. Facts are and should be discussed publicly rather than uncritically presented and adopted as truth. Journalistic representations are not “black boxes” that we dare not question or look into.

Working with Sojourners magazine as a faith and immigration reporter, the editors and I endeavored to not only make sure every claim was properly fact-checked and verified but that we gave readers appropriate context so that they could know how and where we got our information.

The result was not only a more telling and textured account of the intersections of religion with a politically contentious topic but an invitation to citizens to be better informed, consider which concerns and future scenarios should be given the most weight and participate in discussions and policy decisions about issues of import like immigration.

Insight

As important as they are, however, the facts are never just the facts.

Journalists who know their stuff take the facts collected, the quotes sourced and the substantiated reports gathered to help the reader make meaning beyond “just the facts.”

A newswriter may start with a posture of searching, rather than knowing. They may write with the who, what, when, where, why and how at the forefront of their mind. But, with a bit of creativity and imagination, they can then shape a story — a re-telling of what is with an aspiration to what could be. I believe we find ourselves in such stories. The feelings and thoughts we didn’t know the names of. Places we’ve been to but forgot. People we’ve seen but still don’t understand.

Stories teach us about the world and our place in it. They teach us to grow into the people we want to become. Stories are metaphors for life, helping us make meaning. They open us up and crack us open, enable new questions and fresh responses, empower our creative capacities and unlock our capacity for greater empathy.

Many religious traditions try to frame the world in terms of good and evil, insider and outsider, black and white. In reality, however, life is lived in shades of gray. Religion news writers should honor that in their reporting.

The solution-oriented practice of complicating the narratives, developed by Amanda Ripley, might help here. In order to provide a new perspective, and perhaps find a way forward, we “need to find ways to help our audiences leave their foxholes and consider new ideas,” wrote Ripley. She encouraged journalists working in a world of almost “intractable conflict” to intentionally complicate the narrative.

Pursuing complexity, she argued, leads to a fuller, more accurate story. “When people encounter complexity, they become more curious and less closed off to new information,” Ripley wrote. In other words, complexity invites listening.

This means more than simply quoting “both sides” (see “Balance” above) or looking for some moral equivalence but finding and featuring niggling nuance, contradiction and ambiguity in the story.

Of course, as we do so, we will still encounter people and contexts that not only match our stereotypes but embody our worst fears. Our reporting will unearth people who hate and fear each other. Our writing will sometimes hold up an ugly mirror rather than shine a light on the path forward.

However, the better we understand those people, divergent opinions, internal contradictions and personal motivations, the less we have to fear, and the better our public discourse can be.

The hope is that insights from such reporting will not only make for clearer, more accurate stories, but help move communities and conversations forward in such polarizing times.

About Ken Chitwood
Ken Chitwood is a religion nerd, writer and scholar of global Islam and American religion based in Germany. His work has appeared in Newsweek, Salon, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, Religion News Service, Christianity Today, and numerous other publications. He is the author of The Muslims of Latin America and the Caribbean. Follow Ken on Twitter @kchitwood. You can read more about the author here.
"Spoken like another globalist talking head in a suit. Thanks but no thanks. Keep your ..."

Religious Freedom at a 16-Year Low—What ..."
"When the Vice President is slandering the Bishops of his own church and the Attorney ..."

Religious Freedom at a 16-Year Low—What ..."
"Well said, "Yet, these challenges also present opportunities. The same social media platforms that amplify ..."

Fair Media Representation: Faith in a ..."
"You certainly do have a difficult, but important, job! I enjoyed reading your article and ..."

Faith, Democracy, and Other Light Party ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!