To manage the mind—evolution and journalism
It was in my newspaper in bold type.
‘JUDGE OUTLAWS CREATION SCIENCE’!
For days in late 1981 to early 1982, the Australian daily press had followed the Little Rock (Arkansas, U.S.A.) court action on the teaching of Creation Science in schools. It was the type of material papers love, and with few exceptions the news communications industry sold its juicy conclusions to the public—‘Creation takes another battering’. The media in Australia is one of the biggest marketers of evolution as fact. Sometimes this is obvious, but more often it is achieved by the quiet editing out of Creation, or the non-reporting of anything in its favour
How do I know?
Simple.
My career is in journalism!
One of the first things I learnt when I began working for a daily newspaper was that Creation was not a palatable option to most readers. At least that was what most editors and sub-editors assured me. The only apparent exception to this rule occurred when you could compartmentalize Creation i.e. Creation could only be mentioned in religious articles. I gained the impression that a good journalist was one who would not mention Creation in an article on Science or Agriculture, or indeed any subject apart from religion.
This rule of the trade was quite inflexibly applied to Christianity as well. Keep it in the context of religion or be guillotined by the uncompromising scissors of a sub-editor. I suppose none of this should really have come as a surprise, since most of us have been educated by the same sort of editing process.
What was done in the newsroom is common in the classroom also!
My education file includes a question given by a history teacher in a state high school. The students were asked about the age of the earth, but the question was followed by this statement ‘and we don’t want any religious answers.’
In compiling an agricultural feature article recently, I included at the request of the interviewee his claim that ‘because he was a Christian, his work was done to glorify God’. However, the sub-editor wanted an agricultural article, not a religious one, so any reference to Christianity was deleted.
All journalists will apply bias, but the bias of most journalists is towards evolution, not Creation. They make no apology about it, and some take every opportunity to expound their views. This is the major reason why Educational articles in the daily media are riddled with evolution. This ‘formative journalism’ lacks even suggestion that there may be an alternative, simply because most journalists have long ago ‘evolved’ past the point where evolution was a hypothesis. In their minds it is an indisputable fact.
Evolutionists, that is those deeply convinced about the truth of the theory, do have a goal in life—propagating their belief. Just as a Christian desires to see the conversion to Christianity of his fellow man, so evolutionists love nothing better than to see someone won to ‘The Faith’. Evolutionists do push their views and they push them widely through the media.
At the recent opening of a Christian high school, which I attended in the role of an interested parent, I met a young cadet journalist from a large metropolitan daily. He had been sent to cover the event. He knew I was a journalist, and on seeing me he asked what was to be taught at the school. I explained that all subjects were taught from a Christian perspective.
‘Even science?’ He asked incredulously.
‘Especially science,’ I replied.
I could almost feel his pity for the children, as he mentally pigeon-holed the school into the ‘radical’ category. One health hazard, journalists are ‘obliged’ to undertake, is to read what has been written in print media other than their own. So amongst the many publications I peruse regularly is an ‘alternative lifestyle’ magazine. There I see many of the worst aspects of the manifestations of evolution. Many of these people who believe man ascended from the apes, are consciously or subconsciously descending to them. The basis of their alternative lifestyle is simply this reasoning, ‘If the animals are our cousins, perhaps we can learn from them’.
Have you noticed how increasingly vocal the animal liberation movement has become in the media? While none but the most callous would deny there is some substance to the arguments of animal liberationists, their approach to the cause is irrational and imbalanced. Their view is not of seeking proper husbandry of the creatures over which God gave men ‘accountable dominion’. They fight for the cause of their animal brothers. Protests from them are based on emotive statements reflecting their belief that animals and man are equal, after all, ‘How would you feel if you were stuck in a cage all day?’.
Newspapers and other media are powerful weapons for presenting a cause or expressing a viewpoint. In Australia, as in most Western Nations they are currently being exploited to the full by evolutionists.
This situation can be stopped, but only if educators, the public in general, and journalists in particular, reject the artificial claim that events are either normal or religious. Such a false division results not in news coverage, but in news cover up. It is also a significant factor in allowing evolution to dominate the media and manage the human mind.
Readers’ comments
Comments are automatically closed 14 days after publication.