If it was 2,000 years ago, right now in Bethlehem, different media houses would likely be running very different headlines in the next several weeks depending on the angles they wished to project and the interests they served in what we call Agenda Setting Theory. The theory speaks to the idea that the media may not tell people what to think, but it powerfully influences what people think about by selecting, emphasizing, or ignoring certain issues. By choosing which aspects of the Bethlehem story to highlight or suppress each outlet would shape public attention, define importance, and subtly guide interpretation long before any opinion was formed.
For example, The Pharisee Digital could have a headline such as:
Messiah Expectations Unmet
This headline would reflect what the Pharisees expected of the Messiah that is a powerful, visible leader, and deeply rooted in their interpretation of the Law. A baby born in a manger, to a poor family, without credentials or institutional endorsement, would simply not qualify.
A TV station aligned to King Herod would ironically dismiss the birth altogether, careful not to alarm the palace or threaten the throne. Its headline might read
Palace Sources Dismiss Claims of ‘New King’ Birth”
The story would downplay the event, cast doubt on eyewitness accounts, and emphasize national stability so as to keep Herod comfortable and unchallenged.
If this story broke in Kenya today, the headlines might vary depending on editorial posture.
- Daily Nation might carry a cautiously framed headline such as “Bethlehem Birth Sparks Debate on Leadership, Faith, and the Future of Israel” posing questions, presenting multiple viewpoints, and stopping short of affirmation.
- The Standard might take a more direct and values-driven angle with a headline like
“Ancient Prophecies Stir Fresh Questions for a Weary Nation headed Singapore way” allowing space for moral reflection while still engaging power and public interest.
Then there would be the balanced and truthful newspaper which is read by fewer people, less amplified by algorithms, and inconvenient to both power and tradition. Its headline would simply read:
“The Promised Messiah Is Born”
Since I would be the editor, I would quote the prophets:
- “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.” Isaiah 7:14
- “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders.” Isaiah 9:6
- “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah… out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel.” Micah 5:2
I would connect the dots to include the place, the timing, the child, and the promise without sensationalism, fear, but with some touch of humor.
I would state the facts that
The Messiah was not born to protect empires or affirm religious elites.
He was born to save humanity.
To reconcile God and man.
To offer grace where the law fell short.
To bring light into darkness, hope into despair, and salvation to all who believe.
This Christmas season, the question, then and now, is not whether He was born but whether we will believe Him.