Anuttama Dasa

The conclusions of Dr. James A. Bedford's article, 'The Mass Media and New Religious Movements' confirm the opinions of many ISKCON devotees toward the media. He states, '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 (New Religious Movements). 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 ... '      

Over the past two years, in my communications service, I have visited leaders of more than forty temples to discuss and teach communication principles. More often than not, topics such as 'effective media relations' and 'avoiding an adversarial relationship with the media', were met with suspicion. Devotee opinions of the fourth estate were at best indifferent, often adversarial and sometimes outright inimical. Mind-sets - formed, perhaps, after years of 'mistreatment by demoniac reporters' - were fixed.

What to do?

Discussion of the historically prickly relationship between the media and religion is not limited to ISKCON, nor Dr. Bedford's NRMs. It's been a hot topic for years, at least in America.where several in-depth studies have been commissioned.       

For example, the well-known 1980 study, The Media Elite, undertaken by S. Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman and Linda Lichter, revealed that 86% of the 'media elite' polled by the authors 'seldom' or 'never' attended religious services. This was in sharp contrast to the American public who, on average, attend religious services with greater regularity. Thus, the Rothman study provided evidence that the media was out of synch with the country's strong religious sentiment. In his 1994 report, Religion in Public Discourse: The Role of The Media, Stewart Hoover commented, 'This idea, that the natural inclination of media decision-makers is to be either anti-religious, or at least irreligious, is widely shared.'       

In another study, Bridging the Gap, authors Jimmy Allen and John Dart found a different scenario in the newsrooms. Their 1993 report sampled 266 managing editors across the United States. They were careful to include many smaller media organisations not polled under Rothman's definition of the 'media elite'. Interestingly, they found a much higher level of interest in religion. Seventy-two percent of their media sample responded that religion was 'important' in their lives, a significantly smaller figure than that of 96% received from the American public in response to the same question. Yet it does demonstrate a much greater degree of personal interest in religion than the earlier Rothman and Lichter work had measured.    

It is not possible in this brief paper to provide an in-depth analysis of these studies. However, it is important to note that many media agencies and individuals working in the media, are re-analysing their coverage of, and relation to, religion. Observers have noted progress in the media's appreciation of the importance of religion in society, as well as an enhanced interest in reporting on religi
on.

With that in mind, let us return to Bedford's article. It is clear that he poses some immediate and serious questions for ISKCON. On the one hand, he reminds us that, 'Journalists function as the principal gatekeepers of public opinion especially on matters with which the person-in-the-street is not normally familiar ... the public is heavily dependent on the mass media for information about unconventional ... religious movements.' Yet he also warns that 'Religion does not fit easily into the dominant worldview of most contemporary broadcasters who are often ill-prepared to deal with religion, being indifferent, or occasionally, actively hostile.'       

This is the dilemma facing ISKCON. Accepting that the relationship between the media and religion, especially NRMs, is, as Hoover calls it 'contentious', the essential question must be: What are we going to do about it? In other words, does Beckford's analysis illustrate a challenge to be addressed or a problem to bemoan and ignore? Should we withdraw from attempts at media relations? Or should we increase, or at least begin, serious communication with the media?

A brief case-study

On 28 February 1995, the Srila Prabhupada Puspa Samadhi Memorial was inaugurated in Mayapur, West Bengal, ISKCON's world headquarters. The culmination of many years of international effort, the monument to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada stands 160 feet tall and boasts an 80 foot diameter dome decoratively shrouded with 36,000 marble tiles. It is a glorious sight to behold, one that fills the hearts of Srila Prabhupada's followers with pride and appreciation.            

Unknown to 99% of the devotee community, however, is the fact that the celebration came extremely close to becoming a public relations disaster. Mistakes were made that could have severely detracted from our reputation in India and around the world.           In brief, the 'behind-the-scenes' catastrophe unfolded like this. During the afternoon of 27 February, the day before the Inaugural, twenty-seven members of the press, representing agencies and newspapers from Calcutta and across India, arrived at Sri Dhama Mayapura. All of them had responded to a written invitation to 'our grandiose Inaugural Festival'. The invitation stated that the journalists would be provided with a 'luxury bus ride' from Calcutta, fed with 'excellent dinner prasadam' and, most significantly, provided for 'at our guesthouse as our honourable guests ... '           Unfortunately, upon arrival in Mayapur, the reporters quickly discovered that provisions at the 'guesthouse' consisted of a single dormitory room equipped with twenty-seven mattresses laid on the floor, calling for twenty-six men and one woman to sleep together, on the floor, in one room.       

The immediate reaction of the reporters varied from disbelief to disgust. Worse yet, no ISKCON personnel seemed to comprehend the significance of the mistake, nor rectify it, although several meagre attempts were made. At one point, for example, a sannyasi tried to procure cots for the reporters at the registration office, thinking that at least our guests shouldn't be left on the floor. Unfortunately, when the sannyasi was informed that some ISKCON member would have to sign for the cots, taking personal responsibility, he refused to take such a risk. The reporters, whose leaders witnessed his lack of gumption to assist them, became further infuriated.          

Needless to say, the scheduled 7.30 p.m. press conference with ISKCON VIPs, arranged for the benefit of the reporters, was unattended by any of them. In fact, they boycotted it in protest. One of the reporters fumed, 'Just wait and see what kind of articles we write!'            

Sadly, unbelievably, the fiasco continued late into the night. Eventually, two devotees with media experience who were visiting from Bombay, came to hear of the affair. Although they had no local authority, they took personal command of the crisis. By 11.00 p.m., with the sluggish cooperation of the local administration, they had found enough empty rooms to provide decent accommodation for the still angry, now exhausted, guests. With much effort, the two were able to appease the reporters. The next day, after attending a rescheduled Press Conference and the grand opening of the Samadhi, the reporters were on their way back to Calcutta, with decidedly mixed impressions.

The next day, over lunch, two senior Mayapur managers summed up the incident as follows: 'This proves that we just shouldn't invite them (the media). Why should we go to so much trouble to provide for them?' The other responded, 'We don't need to woo the press, they will come running after us ...'

In later conversation, I personally overheard one of the same managers say, 'We don't need those people here. They're too much trouble. I don't want them here.' He further consolidated his position by commenting that during the (rescheduled) press conference 'they kept asking questions about (the visiting VIPs) background and their relationship to Krsna Consciousness. They wouldn't just stick to questions about the building, and what we wanted them to ask about ... '

Is it all the media's fault?

The point of telling this sad story is not to find fault, but to seriously challenge each member of ISKCON to study our behaviour, outlook and ethic. We need to ask ourselves: What can we do from our side to improve the way ISKCON handles, or mishandles, the media? What things must we stop doing that perpetuate our oft maligned reputation?    

For example, Dr. Bedford states, '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.' Devotees are conscious of this pattern and often complain that articles about past problems at New Vrindavan, the ongoing trial of ex-member Kirtanananda Swami, and similar troubles attract media interest, whereas positive events are much less likely to be covered.            

It is a well-documented fact that most media coverage focuses on problems. Conflicts, crises and differences of opinion form three major categories of what they consider news! It is also a fact that many organisations - both secular and religious, public and private - complain about the media's negative preoccupation. I've sat through a dozen or more conferences listening to analysis of the media's obsession with negative news. It's my observation that media people themselves are often the most unhappy about their seeming fixation. The point is, we're not alone in our complaint or in the way we're 'handled'. The relevant question remains: How do we intelligently respond to media methodologies, and not just complain about or be victimised by them?

More missed opportunities

Last summer I visited a major temple, one of the first to be built by Srila Prabhupada, coming up to Rathayatra. I discovered that not a single media release, photograph, advertisement, notice, flyer or invitation had been sent to any of the large Asian Indian newspapers in that city, although the combined circulation of those papers was over 100,000.          

Three years ago, I visited another city to help with communications for an ongoing court battle. During my short visit several devotees, including leaders, informed me with deep conviction that I was wasting my time, that the media in their city was 'very demoniac'.    

On a later trip to that same city, I made a point of seeking out the religion reporter of the region's most prominent newspaper, a highly respected paper with national influence. The reporter was happy to meet us and spent three hours that afternoon engaging in discourse and offering advice to the temple president and myself. At the end of his visit, he confided in us that in seventeen years of covering religion in that town, our invitation for him to visit the temple and meet ISKCON leadership was the first he'd ever received. The point is worth repeating: in seventeen years, he'd never received an invitation to the Hare Krsna temple. Clearly, much needs to be done.

Understanding the essential role the media plays in impacting public opinion, we must take responsibility to reach out and communicate - to them and through them - the nature of ISKCON and what it has to offer. It remains the responsibility of mature ISKCON managers and leaders to educate themselves as to how the media operates, and to work towards improved understanding and exchange of information.             Michael Medved, co-host of the Public Broadcasting System's (PBS) movie review programme Sneak Previews, chief film critic for the New York Post and a devout Jew, recently spoke to the Religion Public Relations Council convention in Los Angeles. He urged religious communicators not to retreat behind sweeping condemnation of the media's flaws, mistakes and biases, but to work harder to utilise the media to express religious viewpoints, events and relevance. He highlighted three places where we can begin.

1. Less complaining / more creating

ISKCON needs less complaining about the media and its coverage, or lack of it, and more creative, positive ideas and interaction aimed at educating the media about, and interesting them in, the Society. The end result can only be an increase in reporting about us, and a significant improvement in the accuracy of those reports. We need more trained communicators, more materials geared for media consumption and better organised events, as well as less mistakes in our management and activities that attract legitimate public criticism.

2.  Less confrontation / more communication

Labelling or unnecessarily demonising others, is not only condescending and against our philosophy of compassion, it is also foolish and counterproductive. Most apprehension, and thus most bad reporting about ISKCON, comes from ignorance about us. It is our job to dispel that ignorance through effective communication. Merely attacking others, even if they attack us, is a materialistic response. It is an insufficient response. It ignores the principle of yukta-vairagya, or using the various resources and energies of this material world in the service of God.       

This is not to say that if a media report is blatantly unfair, biased or untrue, we should not react. On the contrary, we must respond quickly, and strongly. As appropriate to the situation, we must utilise the full gambit of effective, professional communication techniques. On rare occasions we may need to respond through the courts or even via legislative initiatives. We cannot simply ignore the problems that confront us, but we must not overreact, either. Nor can we fail to take personal or communal responsibility where we may be at fault.

3. Less attitude / more gratitude

Everyone is human, and thus prone to error and occasional bias. Let's learn to deal with media people as people. In our relationships and communication efforts, let's learn to fan the sparks of honest, fair reporting. Through patient, mature and Krsna conscious application of professional communication techniques, we can work diligently to solve errors and misunderstandings. Simultaneously, we must work to promote an appreciation of socirey at large, within and through the media, of ISKCON's relevancy and its positive social and spiritual contributions to the world.

< Back · Top ^