I just learned this morning that Mike Lindell — the “my pillow” guy — used to be a crack addict. He overcame addiction, founded a very successful company, and is now using that company to serve the country in a time of need.
But … it’s so boring because it involves Jesus.
If he was a Satanist and did these things, he’d be a media darling and Time’s Man of the Year.
I am sure that I might have missed something, but I have never seen a Satanist praised in the media.
I suspect Crowhill was speaking hyperbolically relative to Satan. Yet, I agree with the sentiment. Generally, positive stories aren’t featured frequently in the media. It gets to be even more scarce when it’s a religious story. So, it may not be Jesus, per se, they are rejecting but positive coverage with a particular disdain for religion.
I suspect this dynamic exists because contemporary media isn’t a public service but a business. So, to generate sponsors and revenue, they primarily feature salacious content. Generally, viewers will not respond, in numbers, to positive content. But, if it’s “juicy”, it will go viral in a nano-second…which drives increased revenues and satisfies the audience’s desire for dirt.
The only way I see this changing is if a majority of viewers demand more positive content (inclusive of religious themed stories). Once the media realizes that salacious no longer sells, they will shift their focus. Yet, I wouldn’t hold my breath for this change because it seems people instinctively enjoy dirt. So, the media continues to feed the beast! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLjook1I0V4
When a famous person overcomes an addiction or some other hardship (e.g. an abusive relationship), this will receive attention in the news media. I am sure that if such a person attributed an overcoming of this sort to Christianity or to some other religion, this would get press. This Mike Lindell is apparently not famous enough. (I just heard of him here for the first time.) The alleged salacious character of media or its alleged disdain for religion has absolutely nothing to do with it, as far as I can tell. It’s all about celebrity status, which is of course a matter that one can also find disturbing.
Indeed celebrity status is a part of what the culture finds appealing. Yet, so is salacious content….celebrity AND non-celebrity focused.
Generally, positive/religious content is likely to receive less attention than salacious or negative content because it’s not the primary appetite of the audience. Given this, the media is prone to promote what sells, which frequently isn’t what’s wholesome.