Page 59 - Key Words in Religion Media and Culture

42 Stewart M. Hoover

production goals have been expressed in other ways, for example through
the expanding offerings of the Christian Booksellers’ Association and high-
profile books for the Christian market such as the “Left Behind” series.
Left Behind was also made into motion pictures for theatrical release. In
many of these efforts, there is an objective of “crossing over” between the
religious and the secular markets, to infuse the latter with the values of the
former.
In fact, such crossing over is rarely successful. What tends to happen
instead is the continuing aggregation of audiences around distinct “general”
and “religious” media. Where the crossing over takes place is with audiences
for religion. That is to say that those among the audience who are most
morally committed to the values of the “religious” media marketplace
nonetheless are also in the audience for the “general” media marketplace.
It seems to be the case that the major reason for this is the appeal of the
“common culture.” Religious audiences want to be able to maintain their
particularist identities, but at the same time they are drawn to the larger,
more general, conversation and discourse.
The pressures in this direction are profound. Their children and
adolescents are drawn to the media of youth culture. Their friends and
neighbors are aware of—and talk about—the latest films and television
programs. Their class identities and loyalties come into play as well, as
American evangelicalism has long been deeply culturally articulated with
its geographies and classes of origin, and the media are adept at marketing
to such identities that for most adherents are mostly indistinguishable from
their religious identities. Media turn even derogated symbols and values into
“guilty” pleasures, and religiously motivated audiences are amenable to such
influences. This situation is compounded by the fact that many religious
viewers seem not to be particularly attracted to specifically “religious” media,
thinking it is good that it is there, but good that it is there for “...someone
else, who really needs it” (Hoover et al. 2004; Hoover 1988).
There is further evidence of this “common cultural” phenomenon
when we investigate directly what kinds of media (outside the specifically
“religious” media) religiously motivated audiences would find to be positive.
Whether we look at the specific examples of media suggested by individuals
in the audience or at more general statements of what constitutes “good”
television, film, or popular culture, the thing that seems to link these ideas
is that such media need to be “inoffensive.” That is, they need to fit into
a general or heterogeneous marketplace and carry general, least-common-
denominator values. They tend not to say that specifically or self-consciously
religious content needs to be part of the mix. They might feel that it is
important that such programming be produced by religious people or that
such people be part of the entertainment industry. At the same time, though,