An interesting study has been released in the US, that shows conservative evangelical religious leaders (Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, Richard Land et al) have a larger representation in traditional media than any other religious group.  From the executive summary:

• Combining newspapers and television, conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed in news stories 2.8 times as often as were progressive religious leaders.
• On television news — the three major television networks, the three major cable new channels, and PBS — conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed almost 3.8 times as often as progressive leaders.
• In major newspapers, conservative religious leaders were quoted, mentioned, or interviewed 2.7 times as often as progressive leaders.

First off, conservative religious leaders in the US have spent a long time and a lot of money building up media presence.
Leaders of the US religious right have poured time and money to work traditional media contacts, and have successfully networked into the Republican Party.  Roman Catholics in the US with media presence such as Bill Donohue and Tom Monahan come across as Republican first, Catholic second. That may be in part because of Catholic blogs, it is surprising and refreshing to see the number of US Catholics bloggers that are willing to speak up when Donohue claims to represent them.

There are excellent religion writers in the US that just don’t handle camera time well. (Chris Hedges leaps to mind)  
Priests, ministers, rabbis, imams with their training, helper/people oriented personalities, and experience come across in broadcasting, (speaking and presence) more easily.  (It’s not an absolute, it’s an observation based on personal experience.:^) They don’t have quite the learning curve most of us would.

This study findings in broadcasting and print certainly discredits the constant online chatter I constantly see on godblogs and forums that ‘the US media is too liberal.’

Secondly, getting people in the religious community in Canada to do a politically oriented react is next to impossible, and I don’t see that as a void that needs to be filled. 
I tend to react when I see Charles McVety (for example) work as hard as he does to get camera time and media attention. There doesn’t appear to be a counter-balance to him, he makes himself available and he is given the time.

Part of that is our concept of political/religious in Canada.
Most leaders do not want to simplify complex issues with the type of soundbite someone like Charles McVety is willing to provide.

The full study is here: Left Behind The Skewed Representation of Religion in Major News Media (.pdf)

via: Media Matters

I haven’t paid close attention the last few years to Canadian religious leaders that are available to CTV, CBC, Global for react. I’d have to go look up who the current available spokesperson is for The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada.
Dr. Brian Stiller was outstanding; available, professional and careful when he led the EFC. He left big shoes to fill.  If I stopped 20 people on the street, they wouldn’t know what the EFC was. If I went to an evangelical church and cornered 20 people I doubt they would know the current EFC head any more than I do. 

I have to admit, I keep forgetting the name of the current Moderator of the United Church, would be hard pressed to name a Catholic archbishop. I couldn’t tell you who would speak for Anglicans, (other than Rowan Williams)  or any Canadian denomination, including denominations that have a strong presence in my community (Salvation Army). But, I can name the President of B’nai Brith Canada.
 
B’nai Brith addresses political/social issues, so that makes sense, media and message is critical to the well being of the Jewish community in Canada. Indeed the work they do is critical to the well being of all of us. I don’t automatically assume Gerry Weinstein will use network time to address the theology of Reform or Orthodox believers across the country. Does the average viewer? 
I can name a few leaders of cults such as Winston Blackmore of Bountiful BC, or Claude Vorilhon of the Raelians, but only because they are news stories in their own right.

I certainly stand to be corrected, and would like to be if my current perception is incorrect. The EFC has taken on the appearance of aligning itself with the core ‘family values’ issues that are the fabric of ongoing debate in the US, such as abortion and, homosexuality. The sub-language makes some of that perception inevitable. While I can go to their website and see that is not the case, they are no longer in my peripheral vision as an evangelical in Canada, by way of traditional media. 

The current head of Focus on the Family Canada or The 700 Club certainly wouldn’t be credible doing react to a tragedy or political event on a Canadian network. How could they come across to Canadian viewers as anyone other than a CEO representing a US company? He/she would have no moral authority and standing to the majority of Canadian viewers. 

Do Canadians think there is a void to be filled?  After all even those of us with basic cable are exposed to the numerous religious voices off major networks in the US, who are happy to react to whatever the story de jour is. I don’t think Canadians perceive religion as monolithic, nor do we as perceive one political party as having a more moral/ethical voice than another.

In Canadian newspapers we tend to get react from professors of religion at major universities, or someone from the PR department of a mainstream denomination.
In Australian, New Zealand or UK print media I access, it appears to be comparable.
Who represents religion for broadcast react when asked?

Do we want a Canadian James Dobson (Republican) or Jim Wallis (Democrat)?

Have comparable studies been done in Canada?

Big Daddy Weave has an article posted on moderate Baptist voices in the US, and how even though they are outnumbered 10-1, they have a significant role to play.