Scott Monk reports from inside the newsroom on why the Ruler of the Universe can’t get a run.

Those quick meet-and-greet breaks during church services can be daunting at the best of times, but what happens if the person you shake hands with suddenly looks like they want to perform an exorcism on you?

A decade ago, at a North Sydney church that I’d started attending, a married Christian couple sitting beside me introduced themselves, shared their occupations and then asked the same in kind.

“I’m a newspaper journalist.”

“For which company?” they replied.

“News Limited.”

Their eyebrows raised in unison. “That’s owned by Fairfax, isn’t it?”

“No, Rupert Murdoch.”

Immediately their backs arched and their eyes blazed with terror. “How could any Christian work for the anti-Christ?” they breathed, eyes flitting for the nearest basin of holy water.

Normally reporters laugh off such exchanges, except that the week before, in almost the same pew, another offended couple sniffed, “How could a Christian ever be a journalist?”

Indeed, how could a murderer lead God’s people to the promised land? Or write the most beautiful of psalms? Or be steered off the road to Damascus and become one of the greatest intellectual minds of the faith?

Like those aforementioned couples,  most Christians’ aversion to the media is understandable—and in a lot of cases justified. The enemies of the faith are many and their voices seem to blare from print, radio, television and social media ad nauseam, while Christianity is presented as anti-intellectual at best, and homophobic, misogynistic and a haven of paedophiles at worst.

This leads to perceptions that newsrooms are directed to hold bias against or censor Christians. As a journalist with 18 years experience and an evangelical Christian with 24 years experience, the truth is far more refined than that.

First, the media are secular. Sounds obvious, right? But this is always overlooked in the debate. They have no allegiance to the Church or to be its mouthpiece. Their goal is to make money for their shareholders, or in the ABC’s case, present a diversity of Australian voices. (For the latter, this is where a journalist would insert that wonderful word “allegedly”.)

The secular will always rub against the religious, and hence the friction.

Second, the overwhelming majority of media staff isn’t Christian. In my workplace, there are six out of about 300 employees (including photographers, artists and editors) who are known Christians. No way does that reflect society.

Importantly, most journalists are in their 20s and 30s—the height of disbelief, according to statistics—and have next to no contact with Christians in their social circles. What they see or hear about the faithful is shaped by the caricatures formed by other media.

However, a sizeable number have gone through schools with religious ties that have left them with resentment towards Christianity. One journalist told me that she’d been turned off Christianity because the nuns who preached love had also used the cane on her.

Subsequently, any knowledge they have of Christianity—let alone Jesus or the Bible—is one of antagonism or limited to a junior high school level.

This leads to the third point: there may not be official agendas specifically against religion in newsrooms, but there is personal bias. Eventually, this moves upwards into leadership and then trickles down to become acceptable practice. Journalists are committed to reporting the truth, even if they don’t agree with what is being said. In theory, they are required to interview all sides of an argument and give equal time or newspaper inches.

In recent years, with the blurring of the lines of news and entertainment, especially in TV, this has been eroded. A few years ago, when Melbourne hosted the first Atheists’ Convention, Channel 10’s The Project presented a story favouring the irreligionists but still put forward a so-called Christian to at least look even-handed. However, the minister they selected didn’t even believe Jesus is God.

A network insider later told me that one of the decision-makers then involved on the show hated religious people because of their own personal sexual preferences.

Selecting poor opponents to ridicule and favour the other side is an old trick and one played regularly by the ABC’s flagship Q&A program. When New Atheist Richard Dawkins made his maiden appearance, who was presented as the face of Australian Christianity? Senator Stephen Fielding, whose background before politics was in electronic engineering and superannuation.

The first question was—wait for it —about science, specifically about the age of the planet. Predictably, Fielding melted from the get-go and never recovered any respect. The vuvuzelas of social media—tweets—trumpeted across the bottom of TV screens, lampooning him and all Christianity.

The danger here is to think all journalists are biased. They’re not. There are more even-handed reporters in the industry than those with their own agendas.

The problem is the biased ones normally end up running programs or are given megaphones because they stir up controversy and conflict—the bread and butter of the media. That’s why so many Christians have problems with Peter FitzSimons and his ilk.

Fourth, developing from these is the core issue of fairness. Why aren’t Christians represented fairly in the media?

For centuries, newspapers covered the day-to-day events of a city, including Bible Society meetings, the appointment of new ministers and the opening of churches.

However, too much modern day reportage has drifted into the realm of the abnormal and grotesque rather than the good. It’s why Justin Bieber and Lindsay Lohan get so much airspace as opposed to a youth group rebuilding a flooded church in Thailand.

It’s why Westboro Baptist Church and their horrific “Thank God for dead soldiers” placards receive worldwide coverage. And why the bling-heavy Preachers of L.A. is a TV show.

Normal Christianity won’t get fair coverage because both the old and new media rarely reflect normal society.

Rather than despair at this, there’s a chance for Christianity to cut through the falsity of the world and shine.However, there needs to be culture change within our own ranks.

Australian Christianity is devoid of an apologetic culture. If no one with a high profile is willing to go on the front foot regularly and speak up for the faith in a Christ-like manner, then opponents will always set the agenda. That is why so much coverage of Christianity is reactionary. A scandal occurs and the Church suddenly is in damage control.

Lastly, should we even be surprised that the media are attempting to gag God? Of course not. There’s a danger of expecting God—and let’s be honest, even ourselves as Christians—to be glorified through the media when that’s not the biblical pattern. Christ’s word will be opposed wherever and whenever it is preached or lived.

We know this in practice from reading Acts. The Jewish leaders tried suppressing the word of God, and when they couldn’t, they jailed the apostles, scattered the disciples and persecuted the Church. And what was the result? The gospel spread, regardless of world opposition.

What happened in Jerusalem is happening today. God cannot be gagged, even though his people can be. His kingdom is unstoppable because the words of Jesus are far more powerful, treasured and ageless than that of journalists.

Scott Monk is a journalist, sub-editor and novelist based in Sydney.