University of Virginia Library

IV. Conclusions: Toward Accountability in Televangelism

We have come a long way since a leading religious broadcaster sent signals of varying strength in directions of her own choosing, and then sassed the Secretary of Commerce telling him, in effect, that where she sent her broadcast signals was a matter of concern only between her and the Almighty. That Aimee Semple McPherson did this, much less that she got away with it, seems today almost incomprehensible. Even Jerry Falwell's 1987 confession, on behalf of religious broadcasters, of "a little sense of arrogance" in believing that they were answerable only to God, seems archaic.

From the very beginning, it was inevitable that broadcasting and its related technologies would have to be regulated. What may be amazing is that we have not had much more regulation. The full implications of technological and legal developments on religious broadcasting cannot be fully understood at this point. It is possible, however, to offer at least limited speculation about how technology and legal process will affect the future of religious broadcasting.

First, the informal mechanisms of regulation discussed in this paper will continue to impact religious broadcasting. Networks, audiences, the press, and market competition will continue to play a significant role in shaping religious broadcasting.

Second, technology is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the spread of technology tends to lower per unit cost to religious broadcasters and, thus, invites more players to enter the competition. The cost of a television studio and equipment once made participation in competition prohibitive. Today, local public access channels provide the opportunity for virtually everyone with an interest to try their hand at producing television programming. Nearly two decades ago the National Religious Broadcasters were offering regional workshops to would-be religious broadcasters. The novice could not then, and still cannot compete head on with broadcasters owning state of the art equipment. But skillful use of video equipment can still put one in business. In the past, the best of the local religious broadcasters were soon entering multiple markets, syndicating, and becoming contenders for national markets. Rising costs are rapidly closing off this option.

At the same time that technology was making it possible

for more players to get in the game, the expansion of satillite transmission and cable redirected delivery into the hands of a few who controlled access to satellites and cables. The result has diminished the role of syndicated programming except for those that have the resources to contract with networks. This trend is almost certain to continue. Programming that cannot deliver large markets, e.g. religious broadcasting, will become increasingly hard to sustain by syndicated selling to individual stations. While individual broadcasters will be able to buy time on satellite networks, their opportunities for developing large audiences will be significantly restricted.

In short, while technological innovations of the 1970s and 1980s made it possible for more broadcasters to syndicate, the technology of the 1990s is shifting delivery to cable via satellite. This development concentrates power in the hands of those who control the delivery technology. They will reserve prime viewing time for their own programming and cut hard bargains with independent newcomers.

Third, the second half of the Twentieth Century has seen an enormous expansion in the role of litigation in resolving competing claims for resources and demands for justice. Federal and state government agencies play an increasing role in the pursuit of claims, acting as enforcers of legislatively mandated regulations, interpreters of regulations, and investigators of claims brought by individuals. Even though most religious broadcasters are organized as tax-exempt organizations and, as such, are not subject to many state and federal rules that govern corporations, litigation and the need to comply with government regulations still impact religious broadcasters in many ways. As the religion-based tax exemption cases suggest, such regulations will continue to be a serious issue.

Finally, the future shape of broadcasting will be determined in part, at least, by technological developments that are yet to be discovered or invented. Since we don't know what these developments may be, we cannot anticipate their impact. But on the basis of everything we know about the first nine decades of technological development in broadcasting, we can anticipate that religious broadcasting is unlikely to be affected in ways very different from commercial broadcasting. Although both experienced a long history of only minimal regulation, that era seems likely to be coming to a close.