But, following on from yesterday’s pro-media post, Peggy Noonan warns David Cameron not to follow the sound-bite politics of the States:
America is not Britain and Britain is not America, but the culture of our politics – the polls, the imagery, the fixation on sound bites, the nonsense, the essential shallowness of presentation and of thinking, the inability of political figures to think long term – has grown similar. To your detriment, by the way.
Shall I tell you what Americans think? We think you used to have fusty, occasionally dishevelled, pipe-smoking, brandy-taking, hopelessly avuncular figures as your leaders: no one cared what they looked like, though they were interesting to listen to, or at least to watch moving through murky waters – like Harold Macmillan. Mrs Thatcher, too, was this sort, though never dishevelled. Now you have leaders who are young, sleek, slick, who believe always and almost only in what used to be called public relations and is now called the brand. I name no names. And, actually, I don’t mean to be harsh.
Here is the punchline:
You can today go to any office of any great leader in America and Britain – business leader, church leader, political leader – and you will find the great topic of conversation, the great focus of attention, the object of daily obsession, is not the mission (making money, spreading faith, leading an anxious citizenry in the right direction) but how the mission is playing in the media. It’s all they talk about. This is very sad.
Peggy Noonan is a columnist for the ‘Wall Street Journal’ and was a speechwriter for President Ronald Reagan.
Bridges and Tangents 
The church is a vast organisation and one which exists to spread the faith. However, we live in a society where the media is the area where all organisations/individuals are judged. I think it is right, therefore, that the leaders of the church are mindful of how it (the church) is represented in the media.
Perhaps Peggy is being a little disingenuous here: in her well-known bio of our last pope, she wrote of his media charisma as a virtue.
I see the point – anecdotally: I limit my media exposure to very little but managed to heard more stories about the latest Catholic Church scandals in terms of media gaffes – it’s not only the leaders who are wall-papered in by the media, but the consumers of same – so who’s playing to who I don’t know. And I keep hearing stories via the European media about how the latest attempts by the Catholic Church to bring people back to the fold or garner new priests are written off by consumers as out of touch, absurd, etc.
All said, my suspicion: the smaller the better – the more PR the more bulls*** – the Church doesn’t need more hype it needs less – the best publicity it can get is from the bottom up not the top down. The Church is not a commodity in the marketplace, or shouldn’t be.
The problem is quite simple: most of those leading the Church don’t have a clue how to communicate the essence of Christianity. We see this not only in all the recent media blunders in the Vatican and elsewhere but on Sunday mornings in the local church. Jesus used a language people of the time could understand and he used stories people could relate to. Why is it that so many priests and bishops don’t understand this?
Why “only an American?” Anyone can be shallow and quick to compartmentalize. Remember, we did not have a choice in where we were born, but do have a choice in how we live.
I have tried in my life to accept all people as they are, not knowing their backgrounds or ethnic groups. Friends I have made were/are those whose paths crossed mine and we went on from common ground.
Learning to do this took time and patience, having been reared in a rather narrow rural part of society. Part of being a good person is accepting others as they are; not thinking that they do or say something because they are. . . Catholic, Muslim, rich, poor, French, Black, American.
American journalism is at a low spot, I agree, but then, I don’t follow the journalism of any other countries so maybe journalism is at a low spot globally? Also, Father Stephen, why not see that she also said that the mission (of the church) is making money???
Thanks Bo. My comment wasn’t a criticism of Noonan or Americans, it was meant as a compliment! What I meant was: Americans take religion seriously, and so when they think about leadership and influence in society (as Noonan is), they naturally think of church leaders as much as business leaders or politicians. British writers wouldn’t take for granted the place of religion in society – they would be much more critical. It was a throwaway comment. You have helped me to see how it could be misread, and I’ve taken it out in case it causes any more confusion.
Thank you Father Stephen. Seeing the cup half empty rather than half full, I read your comment in a negative way.
Regarding the media, I think the church should utilize all methods possible to reach people. Granted, I believe in a grassroots approach; missionary, rural outreach, inner city programs, and especially programs focused on youth. But in this media driven world, the church needs to stay in the front lines more than ever; to be a leader in order to reach the people.