Representation - Who is the other? And who is us?

By Sylvie Shaw

Often in mainstream media reports, there are elements of a divided society where dualistic framing makes for simplistic and easy to follow storylines. Tabloid coverage pits groups against each other when an issue may be far more complex than the surface representation. This could be as straightforward as a division between good versus evil - we are good, the other is chaotic; we are brave, the other is cowardly; we are winners, the others losers. This differentiation is played out in media coverage of events - on and off the sporting field, in local debates over unemployment, poverty, welfare, same sex marriage and who has refugee status. 

Stories are framed in a way that constructions of those WE may disagree with, or are confused about, again underline the US/THEM perspective. This gaze affects body, ethnicity, religion, age and national identity. It creates an ideology about, and a practice towards the other which have personal, political, social, cultural and religious ramifications. For example, studies on representations of Muslims and Islam in the media since 9/11 show an increasing number of stories depicting negative framing (Pappas 2012).

Sociology researcher Christopher Bail (2012) reviewed press releases from community and other groups, even fringe organisations, about issues related to Islam. Common themes in their media releases included the use of emotions such as fear and anger - these garnered the most media attention. In response to this negative media coverage, Muslim groups constructed their return commentary along two main themes - the first were unemotional  condemnations of instances of terrorism (not picked up by the media), while the second were more emotional reactions to discrimination against Muslims and the media tended to cover these perspectives (See also Ogan et al. 2014).

In Queensland religious vilification is against the law under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991, along with vilification on the grounds of race, sexuality and gender identity. Under the act, discrimination on the basis of religion includes both a religious belief system and an absence of any religious belief system. This act, and others like it in Australia, are designed to protect those vilified and to promote racial and religious tolerance and harmony among religious groups in society. However, Zimmerman (2013:459) argues that often the reverse may occur:

'Aiming at promoting “cultural diversity,” these laws have become a permanent vehicle for religious extremists to silence the debate by allowing them to claim that they, rather than their beliefs, have been attacked'. He sets out to show that 'there might exist under the Australian Constitution an implied right of freedom of speech...'.

Zimmerman's article focuses on cases in Victoria around religious vilification. I won't be discussing the case studies here, but based on his observation and analysis of certain cases, and in the context of Australia's identity as a multicultural and multifaith nation, he suggests there is a danger that religious vilification laws in Australia may not promote the sense of cultural diversity and harmony they aim to achieve. He argues strongly that:

'Because of its postmodern underpinnings, religious vilification laws, such as the RRTA (the Victorian Racial and Religious Tolerance Act), seem to uphold the rather incredible premise of moral equivalence between all religions, so that no religious ideas or practices deserve to be strongly criticized and/or repudiated.' 

Is such a moral equivalence between all religions wrong or problematic? Zimmerman seems to think so, outlining that all religions and religious institutions have different value systems and, as a result, 'produce rather different kinds of society'. What he suggests is that relativism, universalism and essentialism may impinge too much when differing values and belief systems are played out in a legal context.

In supporting his stance, he cites the different views held by religious adherents and institutions on a range of contentious and potentially divisive issues. These issues include such significant ethical topics as slavery, capital punishment, abortion, and euthanasia. More broadly, religious perspectives may reflect or influence social values, or are reflected or influenced by political systems in different cultures, legal systems including approaches to war (citing Durie 2005).

The issue I have with Zimmerman is that he concludes by promoting the issue of free speech - and thus the freedom to express (or promote) hate speech. But hate speech can affect an individual or social/religious/cultural/political group  negatively, emotionally psychologically, and spiritually. To highlight the damaging ramifications of hate speech and negative representations of the other (or THEM), Letts (2002: 354) likens these effects to experiences of trauma:

'In general, the overall short- and long-term effects suggest that the consequences of hate speech might be similar in form (but sometimes not in intensity) to the effects experienced by recipients of other kinds of traumatic experiences'.

Religious vilification laws may not be able to prevent hate speech but it can assist those suffering traumatic experiences by showing that Australian society maintains such actions are unlawful. However, not all potential cases of discrimination are deemed unlawful. This occurs as anti-discrimination legislation provides certain exemptions for religious organisations which enables them to affirm their religious identity and values (which in non-exemptive situations may be deemed discimination).

'Religious institutions controlled or run by a body established for religious purposes (e.g. a catholic seminary, Jewish rabbinical school, or Buddhist monastery) may discriminate on the basis of any protected characteristic when employing people, provided that discrimination is necessary to conform with religious beliefs or sensitivities. This covers schools run by religious bodies' (ASA 2014).

Not all religious organisations support the presence and intention of anti-discrimination exemptions. For instance, the Australian Sangha Association opposes the practice saying it conflicts with Buddhist principles: 'Religious organizations are perpetuating divisions and suspicion, when they should be leading the way in creating a fairer, more loving and compassionate community' (ASA 2014).

Another legal case that centres on religious values and legal exemptions took place recently in Victoria. The Victorian Court of Appeal upheld an earlier case that a youth group associated with gay issues had been discriminated against. 

The case began in 2007 when a Victorian rural health centre involved with issues of youth suicide amongst gay youth was refused accommodation at a Christian campsite. The case was originally taken to the Victorian Civil and Administration Tribunal (VCAT) by the health group. VCAT found that discrimination had occurred on the grounds of sexual orientation. Almost seven years later the Court of Appeal upheld VCAT's original decision - that the Christian group had discriminated by refusing to allow same-sex attracted young people to stay at the camp.

The Victorian Equal Opportunity Act allows religious groups to discriminate if the discrimination is made on the grounds 'genuine religious beliefs or principles' (Russell 2014). But in this case, such religious exemptions were not deemed to apply.

Critics of the court's decision perceive that religious exemptions have been 'watered down' - a move seen to 'restrict the ability of religious organisations to operate within their own faiths' (Towers 2014), and to prevent the freedom to practise religion. According to the Christian organisation Freedom 4 Faith (2014):

'Religious freedom has long been an integral part of Australian life, recognised by the common law. However, freedoms that were once taken for granted in Australia can be taken for granted no longer. There are also issues about potential conflicts between freedom of religion and other valid principles of modern society such as freedom from improper discrimination'.

In contrast, the Victorian Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby (VGLRL) supports extended restrictions on religious exemptions 'to allow greater freedom from discrimination for LGBTI people, and greater transparency in how these exemptions are applied' (Cook 2014). 

Representations are constructed in multiple and situated ways. Divisions of US and THEM are continually in flux; values and behaviours may shift according to religious, political, social, cultural and mediated positionings. For religion, these positions are heightened when certain religious adherents or groups 'cannot tolerate the existence of those who have different views or beliefs...and refuse to accept any way of understanding the religion other than their own way of understanding' (Hamid in Glazov 2010). Further, according to Satter (in Glazov): 'A religion becomes an ideology when its man-made elements become an idée fixe and are seized upon as an idea that can be imposed on all political and social institutions in the interests of power.'

To counter the extremes of these ideological impositions and idées fixes, Karen Armstrong, and her initiative The Charter of Compassion, calls for US to 'always treat all others as we wish to be treated ourselves. Compassion compels us to work tirelessly to alleviate the suffering of our fellow creatures...and to honour the inviolable sanctity of every single human being, treating everybody without exception, with absolute justice, equity and respect'.


References cited
- ASA [Australian Sangha Association]. 2014. Anti- discrimination exemptions for religious organizations. http://australiansangha.org/australiansangha/policies/anti-discrimination-exemptions-for-religious-organizations/ 
- Bail C.A. 2012. The fringe effect: civil society organizations and the evolution of media discourse about Islam. American Sociological Review, 77(7).
- Clazov J. 2010. Symposium: When Does a Religion Become an Ideology? Frontpagemag, June 4, http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/symposium-when-does-a-religion-become-an-ideology/ 
- Cook R. 2014. LGBTI youth win discrimination case against Christian group. GNN (Gay News Network), April 16, 2014, http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/
- Durie M. 2005. Notes on the Victorian Racial and Religious Tolerance Act (2001), address at the Seminar on Religious Tolerance Laws of the Christian Legal Society of Victoria, June 2, 2005.
- Freedom 4 Faith. 2014. National agenda for religious freedom, http://www.freedom4faith.org.au/reading.aspx
- Leets L. 2002. Experiencing hate speech: perceptions andresponses to anti-Semitism and antigay speech. Journal of Social Issues, 58(2): 341-361.
- Ogan C, L. Wilnat, R. Pennington, M. Bashir. 2014. The rise of anti-Muslim prejudice. Media and Islamophobia in Europe and the United States. International Communication Gazette 76(1): 27-46.
- Pappas S. 2012. Negative portrayals of Muslims get more media attention. LiveScience, November 29, 2012. 
- Russell M. 2014. Christian Brethren-owned camp discriminated against gays: court. The Age, April 16, 2014.
-Towers K. 2014. New anti-discrimination laws ‘erode religious freedom’, The Australian, May 9, 2014.
- Zimmerman A. 2013. The unconstitutionality of religious vilification laws in Australia: why religious vilification laws are contrary to the implied freedom of political communication affirmed in the Australian Constitution. BYU Law Review 3(4): 457-504, http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2013/iss3/4.

Religion and the sacred - transitioning to what's popular

by Sylvie Shaw

One of the fascinating themes within the study of religion, media and popular culture is the way that these three themes blur, merge and split apart depending on one's worldview, religious disposition, and scholarly observation. Questions of the role of religion in pop culture and pop culture in religion emerged as scholars began to explore divergent forms of ritual, prayer and worship no longer contained within institutional boundaries. Comics, movies, TV shows, pop songs and fashion iconography extolled and appropriated the virtues of religiosity in its various forms. Did these forms dilute the fundamental tenets of creeds, dogmas and teachings? Or did these shifting genres spread an understanding of religious ideals such as being altruistic, spreading compassion and doing good works? 

Much of this change can be viewed by what social theorist, Ulrich Beck (2010) calls the rise of the 'sovereign self'. It relates to a growing individualistic approach to self-styled beliefs, understandings and engagements. Pop culture icons such as Madonna, Lady Gaga, Kayne West, and the enigmatic Tupac interspersed religion-inspired lyrics into their songs and performances. Adherents to these musical 'heroes' followed the artists as if they were gods and goddesses, while the artists themselves, especially Lady Gaga, treated her fans almost as religious devotees, as Little Monsters. 

Hero worship and promoting humans as gods have become part and parcel of contemporary pop culture regimes. Recent movies such as Thor, Noah, the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings all attest to a changing focus on the enhancement of the male hero who, through religious and supernatural means, is challenged, fights back, and in the end achieves victory, whether for themselves or for the good of all humanity (or the universe as in the case of Dr Who). 

But where have the female heroes gone? Just over a decade ago Buffy was expunging vampires and falling in love with them too. The sisters from Charmed sought out demons and again fell in love with the demonic and the angelic. Halle Berry played the sexy Catwoman and hero warrior princess Xena and her sidekick Gabrielle patrolled the ancient world trouncing the opposition but in the process mixing myths, gods and histories, upturning sexual, erotic and mythical stories as they travelled. Does this matter? Perhaps not if you agree with the works of Joseph Campbell on the power of myth and the similarities in myth, story, heroes and heroines across cultures and religions.

But does being a mythical hero or heroine make them religious or spiritual and if so, in what ways? Perhaps it is the 'superhuman' powers of characters like Superman. Perhaps it is the ritualistic style of Wolverine. Perhaps it is the magic of Merlin whose eyes light up when supernatural enchantment is at play. All these characters use their powers to wield victory but all are challenged in their journey. 

Stig Hjarvard (2008) proposes that the relationship between religion, media and the mythical, supernatural elements show the process of mediatisation where popular media has taken over the role of religion as purveyors of ethics and moral behaviours. He argues that the mediatization of religion occurs in two directions - through a process of secularisation and re-sacralisation. To demonstrate this shift, he turns to the methods that mediatisation employs to blur the sacred and profane into what he terms (following Billig 1995), a banalisation of sacred elements into aspects 'associated with folk religion, like trolls, vampires and black cats crossing the street; and items taken from institutionalized religion, like crosses, prayers and cowls; and representations that have no necessary religious connotations, like upturned faces, thunder and lightning; and highly emotional music' (2008:15). 

But being banal or promoting popular expressions of the vernacular and spiritual does not make these images and 'elements' insignificant. They form the very building blocks of this shift towards the re-enchatment of the world (albeit the western world with its mediated storylines). Hjarvard argues that the media changes religion, however I would ague that religion changes the media as well. 

This two way shift can be seen in the way religious themes are slotted seemlessly into banal expositions and portrayals on screen and in popular music. The interesting factor to acknowledging or recognising this change towards religious and spiritual inclusion is the silo or vantage point of the theorists and scholarly observers. Some may not see the encroachment of religious ideas into pop culture if they don't have an understanding about the fluidity of religious dynamics and see only the traditional form of religion. 

The interconnection within the popular media of religion, supernatural and spirituality become, within a secular western approach, a ploy to deliver religious ideas and ideals about the best way to live for oneself and others. These lifeways were once enshrined in myth and fairytale and still are. But the Disneyification of stories and the popular appropriation of myth, creation stories and gods and goddesses steer away from Campbell's homogenous theory of the power of myth and the hero's journey, and become a display of postmodern mashups which, in Disney's demonclature, are transfigured as a romantic happy end and a victory for the heroes ... and heroines. 

As I asked above - does this matter? Stories, like religion and history are fluid. They rise and fall between teller and listener and over generations. They connect past, present and future in a whirlwind of imagination and awe. In music, on screen and within texts, the world changes as we the reader, viewer and listener engage with our own imaginative and imaginary theatres. We choose forms which speak to us, which heroes to emulate, which stories to follow, which passions to uphold. Through the merging of religion, media and popular culture, the world, or what we often thought of the world in solid state, is continually being teased apart, being rethought and reconstructed.

When critics claim that religion is diluted or that religious dogma is destabilised, Jones (2000:414) sets us on a path of re-evaluation:

'Rejecting the processes of discovery in favor of processes of interpretation and invention as praxes of reclamation and resistance, postmodern mythopoetic texts mimic and challenge history’s hegemonic claims to tell “the truth” about the past and, by extension, the present and the future.'

Mythical heroes transformed by Hollywood, pop stars worshipped by devoted fans, and religious themes and understandings of the sacred are all stirred into the mix of a pop culture extravaganza. If religion is about meaning making, then the production of mythic narratives will continue to manifest within formal and informal religious practices - in places of worship, on screen, in the football arena, through acts of memorialisation, community rituals, festivals and celebrations. Durkheim's collective effervescence is never too far away.

Within this interconnected process, the concept of liquid religion arises. Taira (2006), like Hjarvard (2008), observes changes in expressions of religion in the postmodern west. He notes that 'the solid borders of institutional religion have broken down or ‘liquified’ as it slips into the nooks and crannies of society, in the process becoming almost unrecognisable as ‘religion’ according to the traditional model' (Taira 2006, cited in Mäkelä and Petsche 2013). Religion is infilrating the nooks and crannies of society, in mediated formats, fashionista religious regalia, and within myths and fairytales as it makes and remakes the same story, with the same ending - that good prevails. 

References  
Beck U. 2010. God of one's own. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Billig M. 1995. Banal nationalism, London: Sage.
Hjarvard S. 2008. The mediatization of religion: A theory of the media as agents of religious change. Northern Lights 6: 9-26.
Jones S.G. 2000. Histories, fictions, and Xena: Warrior Princess. Television New Media 1: 403-418.
Mäkelä E. and J.J.M Petch. 2013. Serious parody: Discordianism as liquid religion. Culture and Religion 14(4):411-423.
Taira T. 2006. Notkea Uskonto [Liquid Religion]. Tampere: Eetos. 

Image source: 
Animal art equine fantasy gallop greek hoof
http://pixabay.com/en/animal-art-equine-fantasy-gallop-2683/


 

Globalised, Mediated, Religionised

The question of the impact of globalization on religion is fraught - caught between the advantages and the drawbacks. With social media, as well as the impacts of reporting religion, thrown into the global mix, debate over the effects and mediated outcomes become a complex thread linking the superficial reporting of national and international religion-related conflicts, the skewed (mis)representation of religious adherents, especially Muslims (Rane et al 2011), and the scant coverage of positive stories around religious themes.

Social media has enhanced the global spread of religion outside of news and current affairs reporting. Through tweets, youtube imagaries, and websites, news of internal conflicts like in Syria, or anti-government/pro-democracy perspectives, e.g. the 'green wave' movement in Iran, the wider public has been informed of people power.

But media coverage of these issues has all but ignored the significant foundations of religious teachings and values. Not all religions are reported in the same way. It would be interesting to monitor the coverage of world religions and compare the media reports of Islam, Christianity and Judaism with reports on Buddhism for instance. Would there be a difference and why?

The dog that dances with bubbles. Is this news?

 by Sylvie Shaw

Walking along the Brisbane River in the late and languid afternoon I come across a wonderful sight. A group of people are gathered in a quiet clearing, chatting. Right by them are a group of dogs, playing softly, all except one. This dog is large, black, a mix of breeds but charming. It is leaping high in the air and dancing as its owner spreads large irridescent bubbles across the darkening river valley. This dog is entranced with joy - and smiling.

Voices rise up from the river below. Another group of people are rowing in their thin long boats, and laughing.

A flock of Terresian crows flies by cawing raucously - happily?

Is this news? Is it news that people connect with the Brisbane River in a celebration of social and 'doggy' capital? Is it news that on a quiet afternoon, people are conversing and enjoying the moment by the water's edge? Why isn't this news?

This week in class we discussed the push and pull of news media and the oft-held perspective that the audience has agency and the individual has subjectivity in relation to media choices and habits. We discussed the relationship between media and society and reflected on which comes first - the media story and its ideology or the community's or society's values and ideas? Does the media report what the public want, or does the public influence the media to report on the issues it wants to be informed about? But what happens if what if the public wants is exactly what is being dished up on commercial TV news and chat shows? What's your view of this?

When I worked in the media as a producer in current affairs it never occurred to me that there was, or should be, a two way flow between the media and society. Deadlines and timeframes compel the producer to fill the program with informative and interesting material, and with people who are often described as being 'good talent'. Debates and talkback were prevalent - Israel-Palestine, gun control, drug legalisation, logging native forests, as well as issues related to abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, sexual abuse in the church, and other religiously-related or socially contentious issues.

The drama of a debate, the conflict inherent in two sides arguing, the page one newpaper article of the day, all these were grist to the mill. A story with a positve ending, or a story about something wonderful like a dog dancing with bubbles was not often on our agenda. We searched for current stories which informed, but often those issues involved a dualistic or binary framework of 'us' versus 'them'.

What's your view? 
Can radio and television news be informative and not only focus on accident, conflict and drama? Can a story be longer than just a few brief seconds? Is love a story and how would it be covered? Can news be compassionate and altruistic? And can it be responsible, ethical, moral?

Thinking about incorporating religious and spiritual values into the news broadcast might smack of preaching and proselytising. But what if the news spread a message of hope instead of a message of fear? 

Journalism and religion
In scholarly articles about the relationship between religion and journalism or religion and journalists, Doug Underwood (2002), for example, points to the gap in values between the two monolithinc institutions, as well as on a personal journalistic level, between what's reported and what's worshipped.  Underwood explores the dimsions of this gap and questions whether there is any difference between U.S. journalists' own religiosity and the way their religious views may be transmitted, consciously or unconsciously, through their reporting. This could involve - what they choose to write about, the way they write it, what language they use, what focus or stance they take.

Underwood found that journalists' religious values are intertwined with their professional values. In particular, journalists from all faiths brought the attributes of compassion and social justice from their own religious traditions into their working lives. The more religious they were, the more they wove their views into their work, whether this was conscious or not.

Another theorist also researching the nexus between religion and journalism, John Schmalzbauer (2005) maintains that traditionally, journalists would aim for objectivit or neutrality in reporting, and suppressed comments on moral judgement. But regardless of this traditional practice,  the choice of stories (what's in, what's left out), and the players within each story (who's in and who's not), represent ideologies or ideological terrains of power.

The religion reporter for the Times newspaper in the UK, Ruth Gledhill, states that religion has become a seriously-considered mainline issue since 9/11; it continues to grab the headlines. She also notes that religion's shift onto page one headlines  have also occurred due to changes in technology but she comments that this shift has created a challenge for journalists as the new technologies have also put temptation at hand. The result has been the challenge to the ethics and morals of  journalism as seen in the recent response to Britain's phone hacking scandals.

In March of this year, an international gathering of journalists took place in Italy to discuss this issue of ethics and morals in the industry. Journalists representing 23 nations raised the need for responsible journalism and discussed how to combat religion illiteracy among journalists and the public alike. The group, the International Association of Religion Journalists, called for reports on religion to be 'fair-minded', 'promote understanding and bridge the gaps causing biases and hatred among religions'. This latter view was put forward by a Pakistani journalist (Eglash 2012).

Perhaps similarly, the Media Diversity Institute in Europe has put out a short guide to reporting religion which states, in part:

• 'When writing about religion, pay close attention to the language you use to describe other people. You may not consider some words derogatory, but they may be offensive to the members of the group you are writing about. If you are not certain whether or not a word is insulting be sure to check before you use it. ...
• Be careful not simply to repeat common stereotypes about people of other religions. When it comes to religion, many self-styled ‘experts’ will say whatever they like about other spiritual traditions without feeling a need to back up their statements with facts. Because journalists often share those prejudices, they may need to remind themselves that their job is to challenge such statements, not accept them without question.'

What questions remain about news - the way it is constructed, its lack of context and fast-paced delivery, and its insistence, at least on commercial television, to be filled with the same kinds of stories each day? It seems as if only the names and places are changed but, one might argue, that the ideology and the hegemonic outcome remain the same. As a former media worker that position is way too bleak. A meeting of journalists in March this year in Italy set an optimistic tone. The meeting focused on responsible journalism. It was held, in part, to counter unethical practices such as hacking and invading people's privacy, as well as to promote an ethical relationship between the public and the corporate media world.

As an example of the possibility for change, I turn to the American journalist Amy Goodman, anchor of Democracy Now, who states that journalism is 'a sacred responsibility' (Dinovella 2008, my italics). Goodman broadcasts on community media, a medium that provides a voice for the voiceless who may not be heard on mainstream media. Described as having a 'missionary zeal' about her work as an investigative journalist (she is often referred to as a 'muckraker'), Goodman is committed to working for change, reducing suffering and encouraging an ethic of care. She says:  

'I care deeply about what I cover. And I think we have a tremendous responsibility as journalists to expose what’s going on in the world. When you see suffering, you care. We never want to take that out of our work.'

References
Dinovella, N. 2008. Amy Goodman Interview. The Progressive. feb 2008, http://www.progressive.org/mag/liz/intv0208
Eglash R. 2012. International religion reporting gets a boost. Common Ground News Service, April 10, 2012, http://www.commongroundnews.org/article.php?id=31252&lan=en&sp=0
Media Diversity Institute. MDI tips on reporting religion. http://ec.europa.eu/culture/documents/tips_reporting_religion.pdf
Schmalzbauer, J. 2005. Journalism and the religious imagination. In C.H. Badaracco, Ed., Quoting God: How media shapes ideas about religion and culture, 21-36, Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.
Underwood, D. 2002. I will show you my faith by what I do: a survey of the religious beliefs of journalists and journalists' faith put into action. From Yahweh to Yahoo! the religious roots of the secular press, 130-147, Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Spirituality as Business; Spirituality as Heart

by Sylvie Shaw

Carrette and King (2012), in their article, Spirituality and the rebranding of religion, question the distinctions in the contemporary world between religion and spirituality. In particular, they scrutinise the effect on ethics and morality of a privatised spirituality as distinct from the ethics and morality of organised mainstream religion.

They point out that, for some people, communalised religious faith has been transformed through individualised practices - in what they term as a 'silent takeover of the religious' by spirituality (59). But rather than spirituality replacing religion per se, the authors look to western society's underlying economic (capitalist) rationale for the shift from mainline traditions to personalised beliefs and practices.

The authors explore Western historical thought from the Enlightenment, encompassing the the rise of secularism and more recently, the subsequent dilution of religious adherence and the parallel shift towards subjective rather than collective spiritual understandings and worldviews. Certainly, there still is a collective spirit but its collective practice has changed to online chatrooms, the purchase of self-help books en masse, and participation in a variety of workshops, rituals, and other personal development, mystical and magical seminars and courses.

Carrette and King argue that spirituality's emphasis on the individual is not isolated from its wider socio-economic and political positioning. Indeed, it is embedded in contemporary 'wordly' economics and 'socio-political consequences' (61). With this embeddedness in mind, they wonder if and how a 'capitalist spirituality' is operationalised through 'ideologies of consumerism and business enterprise' (61). They note how spiritual questions are normalised through this process.

In this somewhat simplified framework, the authors wonder why spirituality compared to mainline faith does not challenge the status quo, or to use their words, why spirituality is not 'troubling'? ( 62). They desire, or seem to be searching for, a spirituality that is not embedded within or accepting of a neoliberal raiment, but one that is socially engaged and responsible - involved in movements around equity and justice - in other words - a mindful spirituality rather than a market spirituality.

The problem they see is that religion has been affected and influenced by a post-secular religious and spiritual change. To some extent, relgions' collective spirit has been diluted through the observation (by Grace Davie) of believing not belonging / belonging not believing. But more directly, Carrette and King are critical of those theorists of religion who have noted the shift towards personalised spirituality but have not grounded this subjective shift into a broader context of political economy analysis.

Carrette and King worry that the trend to self-styled spirituality will loosen mainline religions' understandings of, and undertakings in, compassion and communal experience. But rather than a one sided critique, the authors redeem themselves through a realisation that religion too is incorporated within the world of economics, business and consumerism, i.e. it also invites these perspectives into their understanding of contemporary shifts in religious traditions. Religion is business and economics - as well as compassion and community.

In this way, it is not a question of religion versus spirituality or religion embracing spirituality, but religion and spirituality both playing in the world of capital, branding their material and non-material goods through commodification, media and consumerism, for the benefit of all who delve and devote. But in this 'economically-driven' globalised world, what happens the authors ask, to meaning, to community, to tradition and to care of the other? (65).

Questions
 Is there a distinction between divine religion and worldly spirituality?
- How is religion diluted in a world of capitalist spirituality?
- Why are the authors concerned about the effect on community and compassion in an economically-driven globalised faith?

Reference
Carrette J. and R. King. 2012.Spirituality and the re-branding of religion. In G. Lynch & J. Mitchell, Eds., Religion, Media, Culture. A Reader. 58-69. London: Routledge.

Image Source
http://pixabay.com/en/abstract-blue-bright-christmas-19801/

by Sylvie Shaw

What is the relationship between religion and media? Use examples from media reporting, film, television, print or online to highlight your perspective on the connection between religion, media and culture? How do the mediated formats and genres reflect religious themes?

Similar issues are raised by Gordon Lynch and Jolyon Mitchell (2012:3). They ask: 'In what ways are media and culture implicated in how forms of religion persist and change in modern societies.' What is your view?

Source: Lynch G., J. Mitchell and A. Strhan. 2012. Introduction, in G. Lynch, J. Mitchell and A. Strhan, eds., Religion, Media and Culture: A Reader, 1-10. London and New York: Routledge.

Image Source: Pixabay: http://pixabay.com/en/candles-memorial-lights-flame-9235/