|
Dr. James
A. Beckford
This article represents a very interesting analysis of the relationship
between the mass media and new religious movements. Although many
Vaishnavas and Hindus would have an understandable difficulty in
referring to ISKCON as a new religion, it must be conceded that,
from a sociological perspective, Vaishnavism is new to Western culture
and as such this article is of interest to ISKCON's members. The
Western response to ISKCON is certainly worthy of study, although
it may be deemed more appropriate to study ISKCON as an established
religious movement which has been transplanted in the West. A study
of the subject from that perspective, which balances knowledge of
the individual traditions now lumped together as 'new religions',
would certainly lead to a greater understanding of the issues involved
for the host cultures perspective but also for the perspectives
of alternative and culturally different worldviews.
Introduction
One of the reasons cited by some rationalists for their dislike
of religion is that it is apparently inseparable from violent conflict
(Candland, 1992). The history of religious wars in Europe and Latin
America in particular has often served as a justification for abandoning
religion altogether. Many heirs of the various Enlightenments have
confidently believed that the demise of religious belief and practice
would entail a lessening of social conflict. It follows that religion
was not expected to be a source of conflict in a largely secular
society. But I want to argue, on the contrary, that the very opposite
has occurred in countries where reported levels of religious beliefs
and belonging have been declining for many decades but where unconventional
new religious movements have developed.
My argument will be that some aspects of religion have become more
controversial and conflictual for the very reason that general levels
of religious understanding and practice are so low. Unconventional
forms of religion have become especially problematic at a time when
large numbers of people find even the most conventional religion
alien. In these circumstances, it is the new and unusual kinds of
religious groups which encounter most hostility. In their turn,
these controversial groups have sometimes exacerbated matters by
responding with even more hostility towards their detractors. This
vicious spiral has occasionally erupted into massive conflicts and
bloodshed. Jonestown in 1978 and Waco in 1993 are the most tragic
examples. But I believe that there are also echoes of this process
to be heard in the suspicions frequently voiced by the nominally
Christian public in the UK about non Christian minorities. Tariq
Modood's (1994) characterisation of this phenomenon as ,cultural
racism' is challenging but not unproblematic. I shall focus this
paper, however, on the part played by journalists in conflicts involving
so-called cults, i.e. those new religious movements (NRMS) which
have been outstandingly controversial since their emergence in the
West in the 1960s. A central theme will be that there are connections
between the low-level prejudice displayed against so-called cults
in everyday journalism and the spectacular outbreaks of conflict
which occur from time to time around controversial NRMS.
Controversial Cults
It is not difficult to see why many of the NRMs which emerged
in the USA and Western Europe in the 1960s, such as Scientology,
the Unification Church ('Moonies'), the International Society for
Krishna Consciousness ('Hare Krishna') and the Children of God (now
called 'the Family'), quickly became controversial. Firstly, the
simple fact that so many of them seemed to arrive at roughly the
same time was enough to persuade some people that a new 'invasion
of the body snatchers' had occurred. Secondly, the movements which
drew on Asian philosophies and cultures tended to arouse suspicions
merely for being foreign and therefore perceived as threatening.
Thirdly, the people who were targeted by the new movements were
mainly young, relatively well educated, middle-class students. They
were not down-and-outs or obviously deprived. This meant that their
aggrieved relatives and former friends tended to have the money,
connections and confidence required to make their complaints heard
in centres of influence and power, at least at local levels.
The list of complaints voiced against controversial NRMs grew so
long that anti-cult organisations began to emerge in the early 1970s
to combat what they considered to be a major menace to young people.
Allegations of economic exploitation, mental cruelty, the deliberate
alienation of recruits from their families, deceptive recruiting
practices, harmful diets and life-styles, sexual abuse and, of course,
brainwashing were widespread. The high-water mark of anti-cult feeling
probably occurred in the late 1970s following the death of more
than 900 followers of the Revd. Jim Jones at Jonestown, Guyana.
This was also the period of the most rapid growth in membership
of the most notorious cults.
Yet, for all the hostility and suspicion expressed towards NRMs
at that time, only a tiny proportion of the population of any Western
country had ever had any direct contact with any of the movements.
Of course, some people came to know about them in the course of
trying to 'rescue' relatives or friends from the movements' clutches.
But very few people attended NRM meetings or read their literature.
Nevertheless, the movements' notoriety was confirmed many times
by opinion polls which showed cult leaders to be among the most
strongly disliked celebrities of their time.
My own research into cult controversies was able to confirm that
even people directly affected by NRMs relied for their information
overwhelmingly on the mass media. Very few people managed or tried
to contact the movements directly. Instead, they preferred to contact
journalists who had published stories about the movements. Indeed,
given the secretiveness or defensiveness of most controversial cults,
some journalists came to play a crucial role as go-betweens and
arbitrators between NRMS, their members and angry outsiders. Only
ex-members could rival the privileged position of a few investigative
journalists; but most ex-members were understandably reluctant to
talk freely about their former commitments. In these circumstances,
the role of groups in the anti-cult movement (ACW has assumed significant
proportions (Beckford, 1985; Bromley & Shupe, 1993). Cult controversies
cannot be properly understood unless the symbiotic relationship
between these anti-cult groups and journalists is taken into account.
The Anti-Cult Movement
Some anti-cult movement organisations have become influential
and materially secure over the past twenty years. They are now powerful
enough to have the sympathetic ear of politicians, leading church
representatives and sections of the medical and psychiatric establishments.
National-level organisations have consolidated themselves, and cross-national
Links are slowly emerging. In short, today's ACM is much more substantial
and effective than its predecessors in the continuous struggle between
mainstream and marginal versions of Christianity'. Moreover, Jehovah's
Witnesses and Christian Scientists, for example, have always been
the target of critical attacks mounted by representatives of mainstream
churches, and these large sectarian organisations have also had
to contend with the aggressive criticism that disgruntled ex members
have showered on them. Yet, these 'established sects' (Yinger, 1970)
have never had to cope with the incessant barrage of highly public
and politicised attacks that the ACM now routinely directs against
NRMS.
The fact that the ACM's dismissal of NRMs is not based on primarily
theological considerations and that the aim is not to convert members
into mainstream Christians enhances the movement's appeal to journalists.
The latter find the ACM useful precisely because it attacks the
very existence and modus operandi of NRMs without drawing
on doctrinal issues. It is actually common for the ACM's
activists to disclaim any 'religious' intent or any animus against
religion as such. They prefer the strategy of exposing alleged illegality
and exploitation in NRM's. In other words, the critics' aim is to
disqualify 'cults' from the category of 'religion' altogether, thereby
framing problems as 'economic', 'political' or 'psychological'.
As I argued earlier, part of the success of the ACM is due to the
high degree of religious illiteracy or the simple lack of familiarity
with things religious among the nominally Christian sections of
most advanced industrial societies in the West. It can therefore
trade on fear of the unknown at a time when so few young adults
have any experience of 'normal' religion with which they can statistically
compare NRMS. As a result, it is not difficult to catch the popular
imagination with allegations of a sci-fi nature about the supposedly
weird and dangerous goings-on inside cults. Journalists find this
approach to NRMs virtually irresistible, even though, according
to McDonnell (1994: 92) 'Religion does not fit easily into the dominant
world-view of most contemporary broadcasters who are often ill prepared
to deal with religion, being indifferent, or occasionally, actively
hostile'. At least, sensational stories about NRMs require no knowledge
of religion on the part of their audience. The focus on the non
religious aspects of the movements means that there is no need to
tackle issues of religious belief or experience. And the parallels
that are emphasised with stories of fraud and exploitation in politics,
business and crime provide the audience with a recognisable script.
In short, the ACM presents journalists with material which needs
very little adaptation before it can be easily digested by audiences
with no taste for religion-let alone religious controversies. In
this sense, it is not difficult for journalists to deal with religion
(page McDonnell, 1994), especially when they concentrate on expressions
of religion which challenge conventional ideas or practices. Indeed,
the very controversial character of some religious phenomena makes
the journalists' life relatively easy in so far as conflict can
easily be made to serve as the thematic 'line' of a story. Thus,
although journalists may feel uncomfortable having to report on,
for example, angry protests against publication of The Satanic
Verses which call their own professional objectivity into question,
the story-line conforms readily with the 'script' of social and
cultural conflicts.
I shall now analyses with examples, the ways in which the mass
media's tendency to portray NRMs as controversial helps to generate
and perpetuate conflict.
The Portrayal of NRMs in the Mass Media
1. Conflict and news-worthiness
The most elementary observation about print and broadcast media's
portrayal of NRMs is that the movements' activities are newsworthy
only when conflicts are involved. In the quarter of a century that
I have been studying NRMs in W. Europe, N. America and Japan I have
rarely found articles or programmes which did not use conflict as
(a) the main occasion for the portrayal and (b) as the principal
means of structuring the account. Even those accounts which aspire
towards a balanced, i.e. two-sided, presentation of the issues tend
nevertheless to allow the conflictual aspects to predominate. 'Cults
are problematic' must be the long-term effect on audiences of exposure
to this type of journalism. The audience very rarely has the opportunity
to receive information about NRMs which is unrelated to conflict.
The movements are only in the news when conflict is involved; and
conflict concerning one-e movement is pounced on as an excuse for
investigating all the others. The aftermath of Waco was full of
stories along the lines of the Boston Globe 's 'If you think
Waco, Texas was bad, consider who could be next' (quoted by Maffett,
1994: 159).
These stories about the so-called cult menace are as much about
speculation as about news. They use events relating to one particular
movement as a platform from which to launch 'scare' stories about
the possible threat that the entire category of cults represents
for other people in other places. This was an especially noticeable
feature of reporting in W. European papers about the siege at Waco.
In the absence day after day of new facts about the Branch Davidians
journalists from various places turned to the questions of whether
a comparable problem could occur in their own countries and whether
the authorities ought to be taking pre-emptive steps to avert such
a possibility. Opinions were divided, but my impression was that
the view which prevailed, on balance, was that the problem of armed
cultists was a uniquely American phenomenon. Nevertheless, there
was also a strong note of warning against the risk of allowing a
similar conflict to develop in European countries. Vigilance was
the order of the day. The virtual globalisation of mass communications
thereby helps journalists to frame NRMs as primarily conflictual
even in countries where the movements are unknown or unproblematic.
2. Conflict as the Leitmotiv
Conflict is the Leitmotiv which connects journalistic portrayals
of NRMs together. This is evident in the extensive use that journalists
and programme producers make of the 'negative summary event' ( Rosengren,
Arvidsson. & Sturesson, 1978; Beckford, 1985). This is the practice
of creating continuity between episodic (especially slow moving)
stories by adding a capsule summary of the negative features of
the phenomenon in focus. This reminds the audience of the sequence
of reported events into which the current story can be slotted.
It also stamps a particular 'mood' on the story even if the very
latest episode has not been primarily about conflict.
3. Cross-references to conflict
A third aspect of the journalistic construction of cult conflicts
is that stories are frequently cross-references to other mass media
items. TV programmes, for example, use still shots of newspaper
and magazine headlines as devices for emphasising shock and
horror. Similarly, the still photographs of cult leaders which are
sometimes used in TV programmes are shown staring out of the pages
of the print media. Presumably the intention is to try to enhance
the sense of realism and veracity by showing that stories about
a particular NRM or leader have already appeared in the print media
and must therefore be true. Since the information and images that
are 'quoted' in this way between different stories and/or media
tend to be overwhelmingly unflattering and critical, the effect
is likely to reinforce the generally negative image of NRMs. In
turn, this hardens public opinion against the movements and fuels
the anti-cult campaigns.
An allied feature of the reporting of cult-related conflicts in
which the journalists have difficulty gaining access to relevant
material is that they tend to substitute their own operation for
the ostensibly central subject. This was especially clear in the
case of Waco where access to the Branch Davidian compound was denied
to journalists. The focus of many stories therefore became the media
circus on the compound's perimeter. The fact that so many journalists
were present seemed to guarantee the importance of the event at
moments when nothing significant seemed to be happening. Writing
stories about the stories being written by other journalists took
the place of direct reports on the siege of the Branch Davidians.
Perhaps this practice also helps journalists to cope with the competition
for customers between different publications or programmes. They
can keep a story running despite the lack of directly relevant material.
4. Conflict feeds on stories of conflict
The next point is that, just as anti-cult activists commonly
supply journalists with negative copy about NRM's, the hostile depiction's
of the movements in the mass media are then recycled as further
evidence in anti-cult propaganda campaigns . There is in fact a
mutually beneficial and reinforcing dynamic at work. It is difficult
for NRM leaders or for disinterested parties to break into this
cosy circle in order to challenge or correct the dominant imagery.
Given the public's heavy reliance on the mass media for information
about unconventional religion, the close alliance between the ACMs
and journalists makes it difficult for non-controversial and favourable
material about NRMs to be published or broadcast. The logic of suspicion
which turns many investigative journalists into allies of the ACM
helps to set the scene for the official agents of control. Knowing
that the public has a very poor opinion of NRMS, largely as a result
of stereotyping in the mass media, police officers are not taking
much of a risk if they take high-handed action against these unpopular
movements. Journalists function as the principal gatekeepers of
public opinion especially on matters with which the person-in-the-street
is not normally familiar. Their overwhelmingly critical portrayal
of the movements can therefore contribute indirectly towards the
latter's control. Indeed, as many informed commentators on the debacle
at Waco have pointed out, the FBI, the US Department of Justice,
journalists and programme maker all tended to favour the testimony
of psychological experts whose anti-cult views were well known in
advance. One of the many scandalous aspects of the whole affair
was the studied refusal to give credence to the testimony of sociological,
anthropological, historical and theological experts on controversial
NRMS. It is unlikely that any of these scholars with first-hand
experience of researching these movements in their natural settings
over many years would have supported the strategy and tactics adopted
by the Bureau of Arms, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) and the FBI.
Instead, credence was selectively given to opinions rooted in individualistic
abnormal psychology. This is always newsworthy, as was shown by
the fascination with the psychological condition of David Koresh.
By contrast, the strictly social dynamics of exclusive, high-demand
religious groups and the cultural force of apocalyptic millennialism
were deliberately screened out of the mass media coverage.
5. Conflicts, journalists and control
If the mass media portrayals of NRM'S, based mainly on the one-sided
evidence supplied by activists in the ACM, are sufficiently numerous
and disturbing, there is a strong probability that social control
agents will have to be seen to respond.
Legislators and police officials in particular find themselves
under pressure to say what they intend to do about the alleged wrongdoing
and outrages perpetrated by cults. 'Could Jonestown happen in Britain?'
or 'What are you doing to prevent another Waco happening here?'
are the kind of questions put with monotonous frequency to officials
in the wake of those two tragedies. Journalists seem not to be interested
in the specific circumstances which led to such spectacular disasters.
Instead, all the emphasis is on the presumed and unquestioned
resemblance between the People's Temple or the Branch Davidians
and cults in the UK. The authorities are forced to respond to these
leading questions and are not given the opportunity to express doubts
or reservations about the practice of 'lumping all cults together'
(Barker, 1989).
This dramatisation of the situation increases public nervousness
and official defensiveness, neither of which is conducive to clear
thinking and fairness. There is a danger, then, that inadvisable,
panic reactions may follow. In the case of the Branch Davidians,
for example, the ante at Waco was upped because of the intervention
of television reporting. Lives were endangered because the story
line was created and embedded in a pernicious dualism which legitimated
the 'authorities' and discouraged unconventional perspectives and
opinions. The shared mentality-the corporate mentality-was served
as the cultural mainstream [and] was reinforced, not challenged.
Waco's Branch Davidians, then, were victims of a media-induced
disaster, executed before the eyes of the nation on television.
The polarisation that led to the catastrophe at Waco was inherent
in neither the religious group itself-nor even in the FBI. (Jones
& Baker, 1994: 151)
Numerous commentators have blamed the Editor of the Waco Tribune-Herald
for running the full episode of a hard-hitting expose of the Branch
Davidians immediately prior to the BATF's assault on the compound.
This allegedly broke an agreement with the BATF to withhold publication;
and it probably forced the Bureau to take its ill-conceived action
earlier than it had intended. On the other hand, it seems that the
FBI placed considerably tighter restrictions on journalists covering
the siege than is normal in similar events. In other words, the
trade-off between journalists and authorities worked to the greater
advantage of the latter. Not enough attention has been given to
the consequences of sensationalist depiction's of religion in a
secular age. To adapt the old adage, I am not trying to kill the
messenger for bringing bad news but I am accusing the messenger
of fermenting mischief by relentlessly peddling negative stereotypes
of NRMS.
6. One conflict can hide another
Journalists' fascination with the tragedies of Jonestown and
Waco stemmed not only from the exotic and improbable details of
the two community's ways of life but also from the suspicion that
the cult controversies were only the tip of the iceberg. Investigative
journalists had a field day with their inquiries into the possibility
either that people in authority had bungled the operations to prevent
loss of life and/or that attempts had been made afterwards to cover
up the errors made by the forces of order. In other words, cult-related
conflicts could be connected with broader concerns about the use
and misuse of state power.
Other examples of stories linking cults with conflicts against
the state include the bombing by police of the anarcho-ecology group,
MOVE, in Philadelphia; the killing by police in 1983 of all six
followers of Lindberg Sanders, a self-styled 'Black Jesus', in a
shoot-out in Memphis; and various armed assaults on dissident Mormons
in Utah. The result is usually a polarisation of journalistic and
public opinion between, on the one hand, the view that agents of
the state acted negligently or illegally and, on the other, the
view that the same agents should have acted more decisively to suppress
the movement in question before the problem had become unmanageable
by peaceful means. But both cases illustrate the more general point
that it is invariably the conflicts associated with NRMs which make
them newsworthy even when responsibility for the conflicts is attributed
to the state.
An interesting twist on this theme quickly emerged in European
print-media accounts of Waco. The long and slow-moving story of
the siege provided an opportunity for journalists to investigate
in depth the issues of gun ownership and control in the USA. In
fact, the amount of attention devoted to this context of the action
taken against the Branch Davidians sometimes outweighed reports
of events at Waco. The conflictual image of cults was thereby reinforced
by linking them with a separate conflict about firearms. One conflict
was 'nested' in another.
Conclusion
This is not the place to analyse in detail the full repertoire
of journalistic devices for depicting NRMS. Elsewhere I have summarised
the tendency for the mass media to characterise or caricature the
movements as threatening, strange, exploitative, oppressive and
provocative (Beckford, 1985). A content analysis of selected British
print-media between 1975 and 1985 showed how this sensationalist
approach helps to cement the public perception of cults as, at best,
weird and, at worst, destructive (Beckford & Cole, 1988). There
is strong confirmation of this analysis from the USA (van Driel
& Richardson, 1988a, 1988b).
On the other hand, it is clear that the reasons for the biased
presentation of NRMs in the mass media are rooted in commercial
pressures, cultural stereotypes and the lack of time for journalists
to take a more nuanced and longer-term view of the movements (Beckford,
1994). It should also be recognised that some journalists have exposed
the criminal activities of a few cult leaders and have therefore
been helpful in checking abuses (Mitchell, Mitchell & Ofshe,
1980). Indeed, the public is heavily dependent on the mass media
for information about unconventional and sometimes secretive religious
movements. My purpose is definitely not to denigrate these positive
benefits of investigative journalism, for a healthy democracy depends
in part on a combative press.
At the same time, however, it seems to me that the public is right
to expect that journalists should be more methodical, discriminating,
careful and open-minded than they normally are when it comes to,
portraying NRMS. Their knee-jerk categorisation of the movements
as problematic and conflictual is not only prejudiced and lazy but
it also feeds directly into public ignorance and a less than even-handed
attitude towards the movements on the part of social control agencies.
The cosy relationship that many journalists have with the ACM can
be an excuse for them not to do their research properly.
This paper was originally delivered at the International Conference
on Religion and Conflict Armagh, 20-21 May 1994.
Back to Top
Endnotes
See, as examples of mainstream Christian antipathy towards marginal
movements, Horton Davies, 1954; Hutten, 1950; Hoekema, 1969; Martin,
1955.
My analysis is based partly on a systematic scrutiny of print-media
items about NRMs in selected newspapers and magazines in the UK
between 1975 and 1985 and partly on a thorough but more impressionistic
study of the portrayal of NRMs in British, American and French newspapers
and magazines since 1985.
The regular Newsletter of FAIR, the main ACM in Britain, devotes
a great deal of space to print and broadcast reports of problematic
NRMS. There is no evidence that these reports are checked for accuracy
or bias. It is enough that they have appeared in print.
References
Barker, E.V., 1989. New Religious Movements: a Practical
Introduction. London: HMSO.
Beckford, J.A., 1985. Cult Controversies. Societal Responses
to New Religious Movements. London: Tavistock.
Beckford, J.A., 1994. 'The media and new religious movements',
pp. 143-48 in J.R. Lewis (ed).
Beckford, J.A. & M. Cole, 1988. 'British and American responses
to new religious movements', Bulletin of the John Rylands University
Library of Manchester 70 (3): 209-24.
Bromley, D.G. & A. Shupe, 1993. 'Organised opposition to new
religious movements', pp. 177-98 in D. G. Bromley & J.K. Hadden
(eds.) TheHandbook on Cults and Sects in America. Greenwich,
CT.: JAI Press.
Candland, C., 1992. The Spirit of Violence, An Interdisciplinary
Bibliography of Religion and Violence. (Occasional Papers no.
6) New York: Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation.
Davies, H., 1954. Christian Deviations. London: SCM Press.
van Driel, B. and J.T. Richardson, 1988a. 'Print media coverage
of new religious movements: a longitudinal study', Journal of
Communications 38 (3): 37-61.
van Driel, B. and J.T. Richardson, 1988b. 'The categorisation of
new religious movements in American print media', Sociological
Analysis 49 (2): 171-83.
Hoekema, A., 1969. The Four Major Cults. Exeter: Paternoster
Press.
Hutten, K., 1950.. Seher, Grubler, Enthusiasten. Stuttgart:
Quellverlag.
Jones, C.A. and G. Baker, 1994. 'Television and metaphysics at
Waco', pp. 149-56 in J.R. Lewis (ed.).
Lewis, J.R. (ed), 1994. From the Ashes: Making Sense of Waco.
Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.
McDonnell, J., 1994. 'Religion, education and the communication
of values', pp. 89-99 in C. Arthur (ed.) Religion and the Media.
Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Maffett, I. L., 1994. 'Waco and the War of the Worlds: media fantasy
and modem reality', pp. 157-64 in J.R. Lewis (ed.).
Martin, W.R., 1955. The Rise of the Cults. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan.
Mitchell, D., C. Mitchell & R. Ofshe, 1980. The Light on
Synanon. New York: Seaview Books.
Modood, T., 1994. Racial Equality. Colour, Culture and Justice.
London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
Rosengren, K.E., P. Arviddsson & D. Sturesson, 1978. 'The Barseback
'panic': a case of media deviance', pp. 131-149 in C. Winick (ed.)
Deviance and Mass Media. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Yinger, J.M., 1970. The Scientific Study of Religion. New
York: Macmillan.
|
Print
this page |
