Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Muslim
Religion News
5 Ways Newsrooms Can Improve Faith Coverage in 2026

5 Ways Newsrooms Can Improve Faith Coverage in 2026

Last updated on: February 19, 2026 at 5:55 pm by Debbie Almontaser

0 Comments

5 Ways Newsrooms Can Improve Faith Coverage in 2026 2026-02-19T17:55:04-05:00 Debbie Almontaser

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

What My Community Taught Me About Faith & Media—and What 2026 Demands of Us

In 2025, the intersection of faith and media could not be separated from the realities facing immigrant communities. | Image created in NanoBanana for Patheos.

As we enter 2026, I find myself thinking less about predictions and more about practice.

What did we actually learn in 2025—on the ground, in classrooms and newsrooms, in faith spaces and community conversations—about how faith and media intersect? And what do we need to do differently now, not in theory, but in the everyday choices that shape public understanding?

For many of us working at the crossroads of faith, education, and storytelling, 2025 was not an abstract year. It was lived. It was messy. It was revealing. And it made one thing unmistakably clear: faith remains deeply present in people’s lives, even when media coverage struggles to engage it honestly or fluently.

This is not a critique for critique’s sake. It’s an invitation—to take stock of what worked, name what didn’t, and commit to practical changes that can move us forward together.

What 2025 Looked Like on the Ground

In 2025, the intersection of faith and media could not be separated from the realities facing immigrant communities.

Across the country, renewed ICE raids disrupted families, workplaces, and neighborhoods. Parents were detained on their way to work. Children came

Across the country, renewed ICE raids disrupted families, workplaces, and neighborhoods. ICE arrests criminal aliens as part of a 3-day targeted enforcement operation in North Texas and Oklahoma. | Image courtesy of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

home to empty houses. Faith institutions—mosques, churches, synagogues, and temples—became emergency hubs overnight, offering legal referrals, food, childcare, and spiritual grounding.

At the same time, expanded travel bans affecting citizens from dozens of countries—many of them Muslim-majority—sent a chilling message far beyond airport terminals. Families were separated. Students were left in limbo. Communities were reminded how quickly policy decisions can translate into fear, isolation, and erasure.

On the ground, faith communities responded with what they have always done: presence. Clergy opened doors. Volunteers organized rapid-response networks. Interfaith coalitions showed up at court hearings and city council meetings. Prayer vigils doubled as teach-ins. Sanctuaries became both literal and symbolic.

Media coverage, however, often struggled to keep pace with human reality. Raids were sometimes reported as statistics rather than trauma. Travel bans were framed as political maneuvers without sufficient attention to their everyday consequences. Faith voices were quoted reactively—after damage was done—rather than consulted proactively as trusted witnesses to what was unfolding.

Visibility Can Still Come at a Cost

One moment in 2025 made this disconnect especially visible to a global audience: the New York City mayoral race involving Zohran Mamdani. What

Zohran K. Mamdani and his wife Rama Duwaji | Image courtesy of NYC Mayor’s Office, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

should have been a substantive debate about policy, governance, and the future of the nation’s largest city, but instead became a flashpoint for unfiltered Islamophobia. Mamdani’s faith was repeatedly weaponized—through dog whistles, mischaracterizations, and outright hostility—often amplified rather than interrogated by media platforms. The vitriol was not confined to fringe spaces; it circulated widely, shaping narratives far beyond New York. For many Muslim Americans watching, the message was chillingly familiar: civic participation can still invite suspicion, and visibility can still come at a cost. On the ground, faith communities rallied in response—not just in defense of one candidate, but in defense of the principle that religious identity should never be treated as disqualifying. Yet much of the coverage struggled to name the harm clearly, missing an opportunity to contextualize how Islamophobia operates in political discourse and why it matters for democratic participation itself.

The disconnect was stark. On the ground, faith was central to survival and solidarity. In coverage, it was too often peripheral.

And yet, when journalists took the time to listen—to document how immigrant families relied on faith communities not just for comfort but for coordination—the reporting shifted. It became more human. More accurate. More accountable.

The lesson of 2025 was unmistakable: you cannot tell the story of immigration in America without telling the story of faith.

Bright Spots

There were moments in 2025 when coverage got it right:

⁠ ⁠Journalists who centered lived faith experiences instead of reducing religion to conflict.
⁠ ⁠Editors who sought faith-literate sources, especially during moments of grief or crisis.
⁠ ⁠Platforms that made room for interfaith solidarity stories, not just spectacle.

When faith was treated as a normal part of the human landscape—rather than a problem to explain or a curiosity to exoticize—the reporting felt fuller, truer, and more humane.

Blind Spots

At the same time, familiar gaps persisted:

⁠ Faith was often mentioned only when controversy erupted, reinforcing the idea that religion exists mainly as a problem—a dynamic made painfully clear during the New York City mayoral race, where Muslim identity was framed as a liability rather than a lived reality, and Islamophobic narratives were too often reported without sufficient challenge or context.
⁠ ⁠Coverage leaned heavily on the same spokespersons, flattening internal diversity.
⁠ ⁠Religious communities were sometimes framed as monolithic—particularly Muslim, Jewish, and other minoritized faith communities.

Perhaps most tellingly, faith was frequently left out of stories about wellness, education, community care, and recovery—despite the reality that religious institutions are often doing that work every day.

The lesson of 2025 was not that faith disappeared.

It was that the media often didn’t know how to see it.

What We Carry into 2026

Are media systems willing to adapt to report with greater literacy, care, and collaboration?| Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

As we look ahead, the question is not whether faith belongs in public discourse. The public has already answered that through participation, affiliation, and practice. The real question is whether media systems are willing to adapt—to report with greater literacy, care, and collaboration.

Here are five concrete resolutions for 2026—practical enough for any newsroom, platform, or faith leader to adopt immediately.

Resolution 1: Treat Faith as a Dimension, Not a Beat

Faith should not live only in a siloed “religion section,” if one exists at all. It is a dimension of human life that intersects with education, health, housing, culture, and politics.

In 2026, reporters can ask a simple question during story development:

Is faith shaping this story—even if it’s not the headline?

This shift doesn’t add bias; it adds accuracy.

Resolution 2: Expand the Source List—and Keep It Updated

Too often, faith coverage relies on a short list of “usual voices.” This limits perspective and reinforces narrow narratives.

Newsrooms can:

- ⁠ ⁠Build living source databases that reflect gender, race, generation, and theological diversity.
- ⁠ ⁠Include lay leaders, educators, chaplains, and organizers, not only institutional heads.
- ⁠ ⁠Revisit sourcing practices annually to avoid stagnation.

Representation is not a favor—it’s good reporting.

Resolution 3: Invest in Religious Literacy as a Core Skill

Religious literacy is not about belief. It’s about competence.

In 2026, media organizations should treat religious literacy the way they treat data literacy or legal literacy:

- ⁠ ⁠Offer short trainings or briefings tied to coverage needs.
- ⁠ ⁠Provide basic guides on terminology, holidays, and internal diversity.
- ⁠ ⁠Encourage reporters to ask informed questions without fear of “getting it wrong.”

When journalists feel equipped, coverage becomes more nuanced—and less reactive.

Resolution 4: Retire Sensationalism as a Default Setting

Conflict will always be part of the news. But sensationalism should not be the lens through which faith is primarily seen.

This means:

- ⁠ ⁠Avoiding language that frames religious communities as inherently extreme or suspect.
- ⁠ ⁠Resisting images that visually code faith as “other.”
- ⁠ ⁠Providing historical and social context, not just breaking moments.

Balanced coverage does not sanitize reality—it situates it.

Resolution 5: Build Relationships Before the Crisis

The most responsible faith coverage often happens before something goes wrong.

In 2026, journalists and faith leaders alike can:

- ⁠ ⁠Establish relationships outside moments of emergency.
- ⁠ ⁠Participate in off-the-record listening sessions or briefings.
- ⁠ ⁠Clarify expectations around accuracy, attribution, and trust.

Relationships don’t compromise independence; they strengthen understanding.

A Shared Responsibility

Improving faith and media engagement is not solely the job of journalists. Faith leaders also carry responsibility:

⁠ ⁠To speak with clarity, not jargon.
⁠ ⁠To welcome scrutiny without defensiveness.
⁠ ⁠To recognize the power—and limits—of media platforms.

When both sides approach the work with humility and intention, the public benefits.

Looking Ahead

Looking ahead to 2026, the work before us is clear—and urgent.

If faith and media are serious about serving the public, then protecting our immigrant neighbors must be part of the shared ethical framework guiding coverage and collaboration. This does not mean advocacy disguised as reporting. It means refusing narratives that dehumanize. It means naming harm when policy inflicts it. It means remembering that immigration stories are not abstractions—they are about families, faith, fear, and futures.

Newsrooms can commit to:

Reporting on enforcement actions with context and care, not just speed.
Including faith leaders and community advocates as primary sources, not afterthoughts.
Avoiding language that criminalizes entire communities through implication.
Tracking the long-term impacts of raids and bans—not just the breaking moment.

Faith leaders, in turn, can continue to:

Offer transparent, grounded perspectives rooted in lived experience.
Educate congregations about rights, resources, and resilience.
Partner with journalists before crises escalate, not only after.

Ultimately, protecting immigrant neighbors and combating hate are not only a policy issue. It is a moral test—of our institutions, our storytelling, and our shared commitment to human dignity.

As we move into 2026, may we choose reporting that illuminates rather than obscures, collaboration over silence, and courage over convenience. The stories we tell—and how we tell them—will shape not just public understanding, but who feels safe enough to be seen.

And that responsibility belongs to all of us.

Muslim

Education and Religion

Faith Amid the Fray: Reporting During Political Turbulence

Previous Post

February 4, 2026

Why Faith Coverage Must Show Solutions, Not Just Problems