Is religion a mass medium?

Tahuti

Writing Deity
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
9,492
I know that is may sound blasphemous to some of the faithful, though I lately began to notice that religion contains many elements reminiscent of mass media such as Television, Internet, Movies, etc.: It stores information and it propagates that to followers and beyond. So is it actually one?

If so, maybe this would warrant to ask the same question in reverse. What wouldn't movies for instance have in common with religion? Movies do have cult followings too, after all.
 
Yes. Why not?

Look at churches and cathedrals. With a church service, you've basically got a pantomime, or let's be kind, a theatrical performance.

With stained glass windows, you've got the basic message in picture form, and some kind of, for its time, psychedelic trippy colourful experience. (almost)

Religion in its outward form is just entertainment. And the medium is the message. (I think Marshall McLuhan said that.)
 
Both also contain both truths and falsehoods, even though the end-result may be great overall.
 
No, religions are social institution that rely on media to communicate its ideas.

You see the evangelist on television, the Bible is a book.
 
This is starting to remind me of the second-last scene in Jesus Christ Superstar, when Judas asks Jesus "Why'd you choose such a backward time in such a strange land?" and points out that "Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication."
 
No, religions are social institution that rely on media to communicate its ideas.
This is true. But when I read the thread title, I was like 'Well, I see what is meant'. (unusually for me)

You see the evangelist on television, the Bible is a book.
So? I don't know what you're getting at. Television and books are both examples of mass media.
 
No, religions are social institution that rely on media to communicate its ideas.

You see the evangelist on television, the Bible is a book.
No, those are churches, or more properly religious institutions.


Religions can be thought of as mass medias that use a certain method of living to convey ideas.
 
Exactly. And I say that as someone who wouldn't exactly describe himself as an atheist or an opponent of religion.
 
For Catholics.

I'll answer in a form befitting an RD thread in a moment, but I couldn't pass on this.
 
Well, you might say that every religion is a type of medium of its own and thus the very term religion might a misnomer. Some religions address different topics than others. Few Dharmic religions possess the coverage Catholicism for instance has.
 
For Catholics, religion is a Mass medium.

The pun is in the capitalization.
 
Religions can be thought of as mass medias that use a certain method of living to convey ideas.

I don't think I understand. I thought the religions were the ideas.

Mass media are things like books, films, broadcasts, pictures, statuary(?), architecture(?) and speeches.
 
I know that is may sound blasphemous to some of the faithful, though I lately began to notice that religion contains many elements reminiscent of mass media such as Television, Internet, Movies, etc.: It stores information and it propagates that to followers and beyond. So is it actually one?

If so, maybe this would warrant to ask the same question in reverse. What wouldn't movies for instance have in common with religion? Movies do have cult followings too, after all.

IMO it is more closely related to pyramid scheme where ordinary people do not take direct order from religious leaders; the orders comes through a hierarchical system and in the end flows into everyone's mind. Mass media, OTOH, directly communicates with people.
 
Thinking further on the subject I now kinda believe that the reason why religiousity correlates with poverty is that religion is cheaper to set up than mass communication stuff.
 
Back
Top Bottom