Having the Last Word, but Losing the Culture Wars: Mainstream Press Coverage of a Canceled Evangelical Benediction

This study examines how mainstream news media reported the withdrawal of a popular pastor from the 2013 Obama inaugural ceremony. Louie Giglio was originally chosen for a role in the event, but relinquished his position when focus was placed on a sermon he once delivered about homosexuality. Analysis of framing and sourcing of the stories raises serious questions about the role media played in reporting about this skirmish, which is clearly part of the larger culture wars. Introduction At the end of Barrack Obama’s second inauguration ceremony, the Reverend Luis Leon, rector of St. John’s Church in Washington, D.C., offered the benediction. His words brought closure to a rather unusual turn of events amid all of the festivities. Originally, the president’s inauguration committee had chosen another cleric to deliver the blessing. The initial selection was Reverend Louie Giglio, pastor of Passion City Church, in Atlanta, Georgia. Giglio was not nationally known, but was widely recognized in the evangelical Christian church. Less than two weeks before the scheduled event, however, he stepped away from the duty of leading the nation in prayer. When he made that move, he stated that he did not wish to become mired in a debate over homosexuality, an issue which his selection as a speaker appeared to draw to the forefront. The study that follows examines how the most powerful news outlets in the country framed Reverend Giglio’s withdrawal, and reactions to his decision. In examining this unusual case, I hope to build on earlier research which has investigated the framing of religion, especially as it plays a role in social or political debate. More specifically, though, I wish to examine the extent to which the Giglio case might manifest notable change in how the American media portray religion’s role in cultural debates such as the acceptance of gays and lesbians in society. Symbolic Conflict over Homosexuality, Religion and Media This investigation is oriented toward a view presented by Gamson (1981), a perspective that suggests significant societal conflict is evident in how social controversies are portrayed in the media. As Gamson points out, a conflict “draws on a catalogue of available idea elements” (p. 79). And, much of the struggle relates to interpretation and understanding of those idea elements. Bakelaar (2002) nicely summarizes Gamson’s vision. Central to Gamson’s method is the idea of symbolic conflict. In each public controversy, Gamson sees advocates involved in a context to promote acceptance of various particular interpretations. By using specific metaphors, depictions, exemplars, catchphrases, and visual images, advocates seek to frame issues. (p. 174) Bakelaar, in his use of “frame,” is blending Gamson with Goffman and with Entman, who both provided insights into how “framing” plays a role in the type of symbolic conflict introduced here. Goffman (1974) saw frames as a means of developing a common understanding among a group of people. They do so by highlighting certain ideas and ignoring others. Entman (1993) elaborated on this, suggesting that frames “call attention to some aspects of reality while obscuring other elements” (p. 55). Symbolic conflict, then, occurs when groups with very different views of reality play a role in shaping communication. Whether they know it or not, these bodies of citizens create This is an author-produced, peer-reviewed version of this article. The final, definitive version of this document can be found online at the Journal of Media and Religion, published by Taylor & Francis. Copyright restrictions may apply. doi: 10.1080/15348423.2014.938978