As is obvious in this documentary:'George W. Bush: Faith in the White House' we see that with enough money, quality editing and political slant you can create a "counter documentary". Hopefully one to offset the harm done to the Bush campaign by Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" documentary.

OK, here’s the part I don’t get: Why are people so easily persuaded by the television medium? I don’t believe anything I read on the internet [a comparable medium] just because it’s published on the internet. I look at the source, I evaluate the source, I evaluate the quotes and context of the story and then I add it to the information I’ve collected on the subject so far and then I do some calculations to adjust my opinion on the subject if needed.

I recognize that no one is completely non-partisan, no one is unbiased (despite a desire to be so) and in short no one stands on neutral ground. However, Television all too often trusted when it needs to be very carefully screaned for accuracy when it comes to news, politics and religion. The news producer wants the following things to keep your attention:

1. Extreme statements to get your interested
2. Process it so that you don’t have to think very much [pre-interpreted news is opinion]
3. Foofy content so as not to really get you thinking about the deepr, longer term impact of events

And that list could go on much longer, but I think that summarizes some of the weaknesses of the current media situation.

So, if you watch the news, and you believe everything they say at faith value but you consider yourself an agnostic, athiest or ignorant – you’ve got a faith just like me – it’s just in something other than Christ.