Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari
“Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women!
Encountering Media Ethics and Religion in Theory and 
in the Classroom
Abstract
The article presents a theoretical and methodological framework for a cultural stud-
ies–oriented approach to the complex relationship between media ethics and religion. 
On the basis of several concrete examples, the article sheds light on the centrality of re-
ligious worldviews, symbols, figures, and narratives within different media practices in 
which moral norms, principles, and values are reproduced, rediscovered, discussed, le-
gitimated, and contested. Moreover, the article highlights how the examination of con-
crete media content can be implemented in teaching in order to stimulate and increase 
students’ capacity to understand, analyze, and evaluate the normative function and 
power of the media, especially in the contemporary digitalized and globalized world.
Keywords
Media Ethics, Religion, Cultural Studies, Teaching, Spaces of Communication, Values, 
Norms
Biographies
Natalie Fritz is a scholar in the field of religion, media, and culture. She received her 
master’s degree in the Study of Religions and Scandinavian Studies from the Univer-
sity of Zurich, where she also completed her doctorate in the Study of Religions. She 
currently works at the Catholic Media Centre in Zurich as an editor and journalist for 
film, media, and religion, and is coordinator of JRFM. She also teaches media ethics 
at the Bern University of Applied Sciences and at the University of Applied Sciences 
of the Grisons. Fritz is a member of the international research groups Media and Re-
ligion (www.media-religion.org) and International Exchange on Media and Religion 
(https://media-religion.net).
Marie-Therese Mäder is a scholar of religion, media, and philosophy with particular 
expertise in the field of media and religion. Since 2020 she has been a senior lecturer at 
the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in Munich, Germany. She also teaches at the Cen-
tre for Religion, Economy and Politics at the University of Zurich and on media ethics 
at the Bern University of Applied Sciences and at the University of Applied Sciences 
of the Grisons. She is a member of the research group Media and Religion (www.me-
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 11
DOI: 10.25364/05.8:2022.1.2
dia-religion.org). In 2021 she won a Marie Sklodowska-Curie Fellowship (EU Horizon 
2020). She is the author of numerous essays, book chapters, and books on film and 
religion, migration, funeral culture, ethics and documentary film, religion in reality 
shows, and audience research. For more information see marie-theresemaeder.com.
Baldassare Scolari is a scholar in the fields of media studies, religious studies, and 
political philosophy. In 2019 he published his doctoral thesis, on the performativity 
of martyrological representations of political violence (https://www.media-religion.
org). He teaches media ethics at the Bern University of Applied Sciences and the 
University of Applied Sciences of the Grisons and research methods at the Bern Uni-
versity of the Arts. He is a member of the research groups Media and Religion (www.
media-r eligion.org) and International Exchange on Media and Religion (https://media- 
religion.net). His research focuses on religion and politics, religion and media, cultur-
al studies, media ethics, philosophy of language, and political theory.
The research field of media ethics has been influenced by a wide range 
of disciplines: media philosophy, media sociology, ethics of technology, 
communication, and media studies, to name only the most prominent.1 A 
similar diversity of disciplines is reflected in the research field of the study 
of religion. Both areas of research embrace diverse schools of thought, the-
oretical frameworks, methodological approaches, and thematic focusses. In 
this contribution, we present a theoretical and methodological reflection 
that approaches the complex relationship between media ethics and reli-
gion from the perspective of cultural studies. If we understand religion as 
an important element within cultural practices of meaning production and 
exchange, a cultural studies approach to media ethics and religion promises 
to be a productive endeavor. Our approach addresses the context of media 
actors and media sources, scrutinizes power relations in representation 
processes, and explores the responsibilities and loyalties of media actors in 
the spaces of production, representation, consumption, and distribution.
The contribution has two parts. The first section presents the theoretical, 
methodological, and conceptual framework of cultural studies and shows 
how it can be fruitful for an examination of the relationship between reli-
gion and the media, with a focus on media ethics. This section focuses also 
on how the media define religion as well on the role religious signs, figures, 
and narratives play in the media. The second section addresses the teaching 
of media ethics in schools and universities. Using a case study, it considers 
how ethical reasoning might be taught. Careful analysis of specific media 
1 See Schicha/Brosda 2010; Heesen 2016; Funiok 2011; Leschke 2001.
12 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
content and its spaces of production, distribution, and perception allows for 
reflection on the values and norms that content transmits. This section also 
shows how such an examination of media content broaches the responsibil-
ities of both producer and audience, guiding students towards a critical un-
derstanding of media, its sociopolitical impact, and their personal use of it.
A Cultural Studies Approach to Media Ethics and Religion
Culture and Cultural Studies
Culture can be described as a way of life or a lifestyle. People and communi-
ties express cultural belonging and its limits in everyday practices like how 
they dress or what they eat. We all use linguistic codes and systems of rep-
resentation – written language, spoken language, language of the body, visual 
language and so on – to express who we are and who we are not, to under-
stand others and the world that surrounds us. Culture can thus be described 
as a system of practices by which we express and exchange meanings. These 
meanings regulate and organize our conduct, since “they help to set the 
rules, norms and conventions by which social life is ordered and governed”,2 
as Stuart Hall, the founder of British cultural studies, stated. Cultural prac-
tices are therefore related to specific normative/regulative systems used by 
individuals and groups to defend their values, which are expressed in actions 
or regulated forms of action, or so-called norms.3 In some cultures it is polite 
to take off one’s shoes when entering a private house, while in other cultures 
shoes should not be removed. The value of politeness can be associated with 
a variety of situations and sometimes with contradictory behaviors.
Culture can therefore be understood as an ongoing process of interpre-
tation during which people exchange, share, and even argue about how 
people, objects, and events are to be understood and classified. As Stuart 
Hall observes, “the question of meaning arises in relation to all the different 
moments or practices in our ‘cultural circuit’ – in the construction of iden-
tity and the marking of difference, in production and consumption, as well 
as in the regulation of social conduct”.4 In each moment of the cultural cir-
2 Hall 2013, xx.
3 More about the differences for values and norms can be found in Kettner 2011, 219–231.
4 Hall 2013, xx.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 13
cuit, people are doing something to provide meaning. Representation can be 
added here, as a further moment in the cultural circuit. People perceive the 
world, have an idea of the world, and express their ideas by means of signs. 
These meaning-making processes belong to the basic human activities that 
define culture as a set of practices.
Representation is pivotal because it connects meaning with symbolic 
expressions like language and images with cultural practices. Hall describes 
this interface between cultural practices and representations as follows: 
“The relation between ‘things’, concepts and signs lies at the heart of the 
production of meaning in language. The process which links these three 
elements together is what we call ‘representation’.”5 Meaning needs to be 
communicated. Language and images are examples of symbolic expressions 
that communicate meaning. Representation includes two processes: the 
first contains mental representations that are individual and part of human 
imaginings and ideas and are produced by sensual perception and intellec-
tual examination of the world. Meaning takes place in the tension between 
the world and these mental representations. Shared meanings are shared 
mental representations, shared by signs as the second process. Whole sys-
tems of signs enable humans to communicate complex ideas – language and 
images, for example, but also sounds or material artefacts. Sign systems 
retroactively influence human mental imaginings and concepts. This circuit 
of meaning is inexhaustible, with no beginning and no end.
For example, every person imagines the concept “woman” differently. 
Our attribution of a certain meaning to the term “women” is influenced by 
our hermeneutic horizons, the contexts we are living in that shape our per-
sonality. As the collage in figure 1 shows, signs for “women” are manifold.
Difference and plurality are integral to representation. There is no single 
meaning, for different perspectives and contexts have their own truths. 
From this plurality of symbols and signs, of models of women’s representa-
tion, a series of questions arises: How is the mental representation of wom-
en expressed? Which system of signs refers to the idea of women? Who are 
the main media actors who determine which representation of “women” 
circulates in the public sphere? How far do the media define what “woman” 
means? Indeed, who has the power to define meaning?
This example indicates that power relations are central in meaning-mak-
ing processes and need to be taken into account in a media-ethical analysis. 
5 Hall 2013, 5.
14 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
Fig. 1: The collage shows images and signs that refer to the concept of women.
As “signifying institutions”, the media provide means by which social groups 
produce and exchange ideas of their own values, opinions, and practices 
and also those of other groups.6 Media order and inventorize the repertoire 
of images and ideas and thereby create normative and evaluative classifica-
tions and hierarchies. In the media, different opinions are reorganized into 
the “mystical unity of consensus”.7 Media do not merely reflect this con-
sensus, they also actively produce it. The production of consensus is only 
possible through conflict and closure. Media representations are always 
embedded within existing discursive formations. According to Hall, “These 
discursive formations […] define what is and is not appropriate in our for-
mulation of, and our practices in relation to, a particular subject or site of 
social activity; what knowledge is considered useful, relevant and ‘true’ in 
that context; and what sorts of persons or ‘subjects’ embody its characteris-
tics.”8 Meanings are constituted in an ongoing discursive process, in a social 
interaction into which every member of a language community is born and 
which forms the basis for the interiorization of subjective worlds of mean-
ing. As the French philosopher Michel Foucault highlighted, power relations 
are shaped by communication “which transmit information via a language, 
6 Marchart 2003, 12.
7 Hall 1979, 339.
8 Hall 2013, xxii.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 15
a sign system or another medium”.9 If power imbalances are internalized 
and the actors even identify with them, they become effective. Self-policing 
preserves power structures and hierarchies and prevents them from being 
questioned. But a critical media-ethical analysis will question those power 
relations. Its political agenda is to prevent unquestioned representation 
processes that reinforce injustice. We can return to the issue of the rep-
resentation of women and ask whether the depicted women agreed to their 
representation or how a specific representation of a woman influences the 
idea of how a women should look. It is the task of media ethics to challenge 
the conflation of, in this case, the representation of the woman (signifier) 
and the woman in the world (signified).
Media Ethics
Ethics is a two-sided approach to morality, for it is both scientific and phil-
osophical. There are three important dimensions to ethical reflection. First, 
moral judgements can only be made of human actions because people, 
unlike animals, can usually choose how they want to act. Secondly, people 
need to have free will if their actions are to be judged, Thus, for example, 
we cannot pass moral judgement on the actions of animals, for they cannot 
decide on the basis of free will how to act – a dog’s barking is not to be ethi-
cally judged, but the owner’s ability to control the animal is.
The third dimension concerns the central task of descriptive ethics in 
examining ideas of the highest good, that is, ideas of the good that consider 
it an absolute, indispensable, and indisputable value. The highest good is 
something that one agrees is worth achieving, an idea that guides individ-
uals and groups in their actions. To give an example: in the contemporary 
world there is broad consensus that vulnerable persons should be protected 
and supported by a society.10 Ethics of care, a concept originally elaborated 
by Carol Gilligan focusses on differences in the moral development of girls 
and boys. It defines correct moral behavior less in terms of the wellbeing 
of the individual and more in light of networks and the well-being of of all 
those who are part of such groupings.11
9 Foucault 2013, 252. Translated by the authors.
10 We are aware that the idea that protecting vulnerable people is a highest good is already 
subjective. A neo-liberal understanding of good conduct might look different, with each 
person responsible for their own success or failure.
11 Gilligan 2003.
16 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
Fig. 2: The four spaces of media communication: spaces of production, representation, 
consumption, and distribution/institutions for the dissemination of the media.
Media ethics belongs to the field of applied ethics. It examines media prac-
tices and the normative principles and orientations that regulate them, for-
mulates normative instructions for the various media actors and institutions, 
and critically judges the media actor’s moral behavior in the different fields 
or spaces of the media.12 Media ethics also assesses the normative dimension 
of communication between people by means of the media. According to 
media ethicist Jessica Heesen, “The core business of media ethics concerns 
the interaction of human communication partners mediated by media. The 
area of particular relevance to media ethics therefore relates to mediatised 
human communication.”13 The human communication of the media actors 
takes place in four different media spaces or spaces of communication, those 
of production, representation, consumption, and distribution. In each of 
these interrelated spaces, media actors perform actions, make decisions, and 
communicate with media actors in other spaces (fig. 2), only between the 
spaces of production and consumption is no immediate communication.14
Media professionals are located in the space of production, which is 
where the media – for example, newspaper articles, advertisings, fiction 
films, and documentaries– are made. More than one actor is usually in-
12 Heesen 2016, 3; Veith/Bohrmann/Reichelt 2018.
13 Heesen 2016, 2. Translated by the authors.
14 The interface between religion and the spaces of communication is explored in detail in 
Mäder 2020, 48–62.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 17
volved in the media production process. For example, the production of 
audio-visual media involves actors both behind and in front of the camera 
and often also in the production office. In this space people decide what 
stories are told with what kind of means. For both documentary media and 
fiction film, social actors behind and in front of the camera, who may be 
non-professional or professional depending on the film genre, make myriad 
decisions about how to depict the story. Thus producers and directors of 
documentaries select the social actors for their particular case and decide 
which statements are included in the film; they determine how a scene is 
shot, from which angle the (social) actors are filmed, and how the narrative 
is edited. The (social) actors in front of the camera influence this decision 
process too. An actor interprets a character in collaboration with the direc-
tor, and the social actor’s relation with the filmmaker is often a key factor 
in how a documentary’s narrative evolves. Filmmakers and (social) actors’ 
mutual relationship defines how the empirical facts of a documentary or 
the fictional world of a feature film are presented.15 Thus the actual (re)
presentation is affected not only by the dialogue and action, but also by the 
setting in which the film is shot, how the costumes look, and what props 
are used. The filmic staging and editing, the encoded story in the space of 
representation, is what the audience receives and decodes.16
As was noted above in the context of mental representations and the 
system of signs, the space of representation is central to meaning-making 
processes and the relation between ideas about the world and the interpre-
tation of the historical world. Also, in this space actions formed as narra-
tives, both fictional and documentary, define how the story evolves. Here 
someone tells a story that can be scrutinized. Some individuals or groups 
of people are more eligible to define which narratives are told and how the 
stories are shaped. Some human beings are granted a voice, while some do 
not appear at all or are depicted by others. Therefore, in the space of rep-
resentation, the media actors themselves apply modes of ethical reasoning.
15 There are documentaries without social actors, for example nature films. But even 
there, nature is not objectively depicted. The narrative always has a specific aim, which 
determines for whom it is produced and what story the producers want to tell. Often 
nature itself becomes a social actor that represents a paradise-like version of a perfect 
world, as in films produced by National Geographic or in BBC Wildlife documentaries. See 
Aufderheide 2007, 117–124.
16 The model of encoding and decoding refers to the model elaborated by Stuart Hall in the 
1980s in the context of television productions. See Hall 2006, 233–246.
18 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
A revealing example is provided by the Bechdel test, which considers female 
stereotypes in fiction films and was first proposed by graphic novel Alison Bech-
del in her comic strip Dykes to Watch Out For.17 To pass the Bechdel test three 
questions must be answered in the affirmative: Are there at least two female 
protagonists? Do they talk to each other? Are they talking about something oth-
er than a male character? It is striking how many films and series fail this test. 
That result is confirmed by a scientific study undertaken by Martha Lauzen at 
the Center for the Study of Women in Television & Film in San Diego, about the 
under-representation of women in cinema and television.18 Lauzen concludes 
that the proportion of female protagonists dropped from 40 percent in 2019 to 
29 per cent in 2020.19 The Bechdel test and the investigation of the representa-
tion of women form just one indicator of the unequal distribution of media 
presence and the part played by privilege in meaning-making processes. For race 
and ethnicity, other criteria included in Lauzen’s study, the results are similar.
The space of consumption is where the film is received. Film reception is 
understood as an active process in which the audience decides not only what 
they watch but also how they judge it. Being a spectator in the digital age 
allows preferences to be easily communicated both to the online community 
and to algorithms that ensure similar content or media format pops up for that 
spectator again. Preferences turn into persistent “filter bubbles”. The audience 
therefore is left with the responsibility to think critically about what it likes 
and dislikes and also to pursue strategies to engage less convenient content.20
And finally, in the space of distribution media actors make decisions 
about how and where media are distributed. In the case of pornography or 
violent or discriminative representations, the institutions which distribute 
such content – for example social media platforms – can be held liable for 
protecting underage consumers. The extent to which social media platforms 
like Instagram are responsible for the content provided by their users is 
currently much debated. Thus, for example, stereotypical and hegemonic 
representations of “beautiful bodies” have been shown to affect the physi-
cal and mental well-being of young people, leading to eating disorders like 
17 Fischer 2015.
18 Lauzen 2021.
19 Also remarkable is the fact that the presence of male characters aged sixty or more is 
almost twice more likely than the presence of female characters of the same age (10 % 
versus 6 %).
20 See Zuboff 2019.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 19
bulimia and anorexia.21 Yet within social media groups, likes and emojis 
motivate members to deprive themselves of sustenance, while algorithms 
endorse such damaging behavior by revealing to those members more sites 
with similar content.
The media actors in the spaces of production, representation, consump-
tion, and distribution follow a variety of goals through a variety of strategies. 
They are connected, however, from an ethical point of view by their respon-
sibility for their actions that might impact others well-being. For this reason 
in particular, the concept of responsibility is central in media-ethical discus-
sions. It has been elaborated by the media ethicist Rüdiger Funiok, who breaks 
down the question of responsibility into six sub-questions: Who is responsi-
ble? For which action is that person responsible? What are the consequences 
of the action? Who is affected by the action? To which authority or instance 
(personal conscience, the public) does the acting person have to answer for 
the action? Why does the acting person have to answer for the action (val-
ues, norms, criteria)?22 Through these various aspects of responsibility, moral 
agency in all its complexity can be ethically analyzed. The question of the 
authority to which the actor must answer is particularly challenging. Social 
actors may hold fundamentally different ideas about what is good or bad, feel 
a certain loyalty towards certain groups, and follow specific agendas.
Loyalties particularly influence the ethical decision-making process and 
moral reasoning, as the theologian and social ethicist Ralph B. Potter noted. 
Building on the work of social ethicist Walter Georg Muelder (1907–2004), 
Potter sought to span the gap between guidelines and appropriate action.23 
His “Potter Box” is a tool that allows differentiation between four elements 
of a moral argument: (1) the empirical facts, (2) the hermeneutic horizons of 
the parties, (3) the parties’ loyalties, and (4) the modes of ethical reasoning.24 
Disagreement about the correct moral decision may form in any or all these 
aspects.
In the following section moral reasoning is considered in light of a poster 
produced by the Swiss People’s Party (SVP) in March 2021, at the time of the 
veil-ban referendum (fig. 3).25
21 Morris/Katzman 2003, 287–289.
22 Funiok 2011, 68–74.
23 Potter 1972, 102.
24 For a detailed discussion of the Potter Box see Mäder 2020, 266–269; Christians/Fackler/
McKee/Kreshel 2020, 4–13.
25 Unknown author 2021.
20 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
Fig. 3: Poster issued by the Swiss 
People’s Party’s at the time of 
an initiative to ban veiling.
Religion, Moral Reasoning, and a Political Poster
Different moral arguments can lead to either the rejection of the poster or 
its appreciation.
We can understand where moral dispute can arise in relation to this post-
er by posing four questions related to the four elements of the Potter Box.
(1) What is depicted on the poster? The poster shows a person wearing a 
black veil. The eyes are endowed with feminine attributes in the form of long 
lashes and their almond shape. The person wears a niqab, a veil that covers 
the head and all but the eyes on the face. We can assume that a Muslim 
woman is depicted. Her facial expression tells us that she is angry. The red 
background highlights her emotional attitude. So far so good. But can we 
see more? We might wonder if her emotional attitude is connected to the 
poster’s text: “Stop extremism! Veil ban, yes.” But the decoding of the empir-
ical facts might be contested. Should extremism be stopped because veiled 
women are angry or are angry veiled women a signifier for extremism? The 
application of different values in answering this first, empirical, question 
may produce a moral dispute – does the response focus on perceptions of 
the woman’s emotions or on veiled women as an expression of extremism?
(2) How might the image on the poster be interpreted? Let us accept 
that she is angry. Additional text and context might help us understand the 
reasons for her expression. But is she angry because she did not agree to 
be depicted on this poster? Or is she angry because Switzerland is going to 
vote on banning the veil. Or, and this is most likely, is the poster-producer’s 
intention to suggest that niqab-wearing women are extremists, even terror-
ists, and a threat to Switzerland? Whether the woman is angry about being 
used for a political campaign or about the suggested connection between 
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 21
veiled women and terrorism provides the woman with different messages 
and meanings. For this question the disagreement is about how the facts 
should be interpreted and is thus related to the hermeneutic horizon of the 
disputants. We are concerned here with the way in which a statement or 
event is decoded. Interpretation is connected to the cultural, educational, or 
political context of the person who is interpreting. Some people will already 
feel threatened by the idea of a woman wearing a headscarf because they 
experience it as alien to their lifestyle and what they consider their own cul-
tural (or national) values and identities. For others, a woman in a headscarf 
represents a legitimate part of what they consider a cosmopolitan lifestyle 
in a globalized world. These two interpretative options are not the only 
possible interpretations, but they exemplify how images that are read as 
religious narratives and symbols can trigger affirmation or rejection. Con-
tradictory opinions about religion often emerge on the basis of belonging 
and identity processes that are referenced with the third question.26
(3) Who is loyal to whom? The image can generate different relation-
ships of loyalty that are a result of worldviews, political convictions, social 
milieus, and the experiences of individuals and groups. In the act of recep-
tion, some people will identify with the right-wing referendum committee, 
while others will relate to the woman wearing a niqab. Such expressions 
of loyalty depend on the interpretation of the image or, more precisely, the 
articulation of signs within the image by means of existing cultural frames. 
A quantitative study shows that religious spectators generally respond more 
positively than non-religious spectators to the depiction of religion in doc-
umentaries. And that the reverse also holds: less religious people are more 
critical of the positive depiction of religious actors.27
(4) Which modes of ethical reasoning are used to assess the moral val-
ues expressed by the image? This final question relates to the principles 
by which people decide what is correct or incorrect conduct. Ethical rea-
soning seems the most challenging dimension because it asks about an 
ethical classification that is more abstract than the first three questions. It 
involves defining preferences or hierarchies of concepts to determine the 
26 A detailed discussion how images of religion define groups or how individuals identify 
with specific depictions of religion can be found in Fritz/Höpflinger/Mäder/Pezzoli-Olgiati/
Knauss 2018, 153–192.
27 The study also showed that audiences have greater empathy for a Mormon protagonist 
than for a Muslim even when both are depicted positively. See Mäder/Soto-Sanfiel 2019, 
98–114.
22 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
ethical reasoning that is most important for a society or individual – in this 
instance posing freedom of expression against presumptions generated by 
cultural-religious background. For some people the moral argument about 
freedom of speech is more important and permits the public disseminata-
tion of any kind of opinion. For others, the connection of a people by type 
to corrupt and illegal activities is morally contemptible. The Swiss voted in 
favor of the veil ban in the 2021 referendum, suggesting that the poster’s 
producers had indeed given visual form to the population’s latent fear of 
“the foreign”. Since March 2021 covering one’s face in public spaces, for ex-
ample by wearing a niqab, is illegal in Switzerland.28 Ironically the result of 
the referendum was presented at a press conference by Minister of Justice 
Karin Keller-Suter wearing a face mask that covered all but her eyes. She 
wore the face mask as a response to the pandemic. Whose face is covered 
and for what reason is a key element of ethical reasoning around this issue. 
Our example also shows the extent of the power of the media and its actors 
to define what religion is and which values are communicated by means of 
religious signs, symbols, and narratives.29
Religious Media and Religion in the Media
As we have seen, media ethics can be defined as the critical investigation 
and discussion of media practices on four levels of action (representation, 
production, consumption/reception, and distribution). We turn now to 
specific practices of interest to a cultural studies–oriented investigation 
of the relationship between media ethics and religion. An approach to this 
relationship may focus in first place on the media practices of religious indi-
viduals, groups, organizations, and institutions. It would emphasize the in-
tentionality of the agents and center on questions such as: How do religious 
agents use the media to express, represent, and disseminate their values, 
worldviews, and moral principles? How do religious agents consume and 
receive the media? In fact, the study of religion has always been a study of 
media as well, because religious action is and always was essentially a com-
municative act through a range of media. People have always used different 
28 Bondolfi 2021.
29 For an introduction to this topic see, for example, Fritz/Höpflinger/Mäder/Pezzoli-Olgiati/
Knauss 2018.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 23
media – the body, ritual objects, images, spoken and written language, for 
example – not only to convey religious views and beliefs but also to interpret 
and understand the world around them religiously. The mediatization of re-
ligion is thus not a new phenomenon that started with the “new media” but 
an essential aspect of religion itself.30 However, the emergence of new me-
dia and media practices in the modern and contemporary world has led to a 
major transformation in how religious actors use and receive media and in 
the cultural and social roles played by religion in general. As Mia Lövhheim 
and Gordon Lynch observe, mediatization – understood here specifically 
as “a meta-process shaping modern society along with individualization, 
globalization and commercialization” – entails the transformation of three 
aspects of religion:
First, the media become the primary source of information about reli-
gious issues in society. Second, the media are not only distributors of 
religious information and experiences, they also produce religious experi-
ences through shaping these according to the demand of popular media 
genres. Religious symbols, practices and beliefs thus become raw materi-
al for media’s own purposes and narratives. Third, through their position 
in society, media become social and cultural environments that take over 
many of the functions of institutionalised religions such as providing 
moral and spiritual guidance and a sense of community.31
The last point is particularly interesting in relation to our subject. If the 
media are taking over many of the functions of institutionalized religion, 
including providing moral guidance, then a critical study of the relationship 
between media ethics and religion should not only examine the phenomena 
of religious media production, distribution, and consumption/reception, 
but also address the role that religious symbols, motives, figures, and 
narratives play in media representation, including when producers, distrib-
utors, and receivers are not explicitly and intentionally acting religiously. 
This approach bases on an understanding of religion, according to which 
“religion must be conceived in an open way, as social stakeholder in the 
form of institutions, organisations, and communities as well as a com-
munication system of worldviews and practices involving individuals and 
30 Funiok 2010.
31 Lövheim/Lynch 2011.
24 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
Fig. 4: Film still 
First Reformed 
(Paul Schrader, 
USA 2017), 01:06:56.
communities”.32 In other words, the relationship between media and reli-  
gion is embedded in a cultural environment and not just in specific religious 
traditions. The medial dimensions of religion and the associated meanings 
interact constantly with individuals and collectives as well as with social 
actors and systems such as politics, economy, art, and education. While 
some theories of religion may assume that religion takes place within the 
sphere of activity of religious institutions and organizations, religious com-
munication is not contained within the limits of religious institutions and 
communities. Media representations of religion wander through various 
social and cultural spheres and times, where they are adapted and changed. 
This recognition marks a conscious departure from the assumption that re-
ligious institutions are largely responsible for the theoretical determination 
of religion and that the loss of power by these institutions causes a direct 
loss of religion. The point here is not to question the validity of theories of 
secularization, but to examine other forms of religious presence in culture.
We can illustrate the breadth of religious communication with an exam-
ple. Figure 4 shows a church notice board displaying the question, “Will God 
forgive us?” We can read the question in light of its syntax, so independently 
of its location or context: a subject (God) is linked to an action (forgive) and 
an object (us). The question mark indicates that it is not a statement but 
a query; it exists in an extra-linguistic situation in which someone asks a 
question of an unspecified number of people. Although the sentence does 
not specify what we have done that needs forgiveness, it is likely that most 
32 Pezzoli-Olgiati 2015, 17.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 25
recipients will have an inkling of the intended reason: “Will God forgive us 
our sins?” Here, however, the recipient has left the purely formal level of 
syntactic analysis and has already begun to interpret. The recipient refers 
back to their own experiences and memories to determine more than what 
the sentence explicitly says. They recall that the terms “God”, “forgive”, and 
“us” often appear together with the words “our sins”. In other words, they 
interpret the sentence according to conventions of language use that they 
have learned throughout their life.
But who is the author of the sentence? And who are the addressees? 
Which “we” and which “God” are meant? To answer these questions, the 
recipient must consider the pragmatic and hermeneutic context in which 
the sentence is embedded. Much can be learned by analyzing the image or 
the internal context of the sentence. The medium of the sentences is a sign 
belonging to “First Reformed Church”. One can therefore assume that a Re-
formed pastor or another person with connection to the Reformed church 
placed the inscription on the board and that the question is addressed to a 
local Reformed church community in the Anglo-Saxon world. We can there-
fore also assume that the sentence refers to a Christian, more specifically 
Reformed, understanding of God and sin. One could go further and hypothe-
size that given the usual function of church signs, the phrase may introduce 
the theme of a worship service or some other form of religious gathering. 
In addition, the fact that the sentence is on a church sign could be inter-
preted as an indication that the question is not intended to be answered 
directly, but rather is posed in order to stimulate thinking about sinfulness 
and forgiveness. But it could also be understood as an accusation packaged 
in the form of a rhetorical question, as a moral judgement. Knowledge of 
the medium provides only partial information about the intended function 
of the sentence’s display.
To confirm or reject such presumptions we can turn to the context in 
which the image appears and is embedded. The recipient must consider 
where, when, by whom, for whom, and why the sentence was placed on 
the church notice board. But the recipient is seeing the panel not directly 
on site, but mediated in a picture, and therefore needs to know also where, 
when, by whom, for whom and why the picture was taken. Specifically, in 
this instance the recipient has to interpret the image as part of the cinemat-
ic language employed in Paul Schrader’s First Reformed (US 2017). The cine-
matic narrative gives us information about the meaning of the sentence on 
the church sign: it was put up by the protagonist, Reverend Ernst Toller. The 
26 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
story relays that the protagonist interprets and denounces the human ac-
tions responsible for climate change and environmental pollution as sinful.
First Reformed tells the story of former military chaplain, Ernst Toller, 
who now ministers at the First Reformed Church in the small town of Snow-
bridge, in upstate New York. Toller lost a son in the Iraq war and feels guilty 
for not stopping him from going to war. In the voice-over Toller shares with 
the viewer the thoughts that he writes in his diary. His desperation and 
hopelessness become clear. An encounter with a married couple, Mary and 
Michael Mensana, sets the story in motion. Michael explains to the pastor 
his belief that because of climate change, it is morally wrong to have chil-
dren. However, Mary is pregnant and wants to keep the child. Pastor Toller 
tries to change the climate activist’s mind by pointing out that the choice of 
an abortion does not rest solely with him; the decision is also Mary’s. And 
he criticizes Michael’s hopelessness and despair as an expression of Kier-
kegaard’s “sickness unto death” that can be overcome by the leap of faith 
that is only possible when the individual is aware of their own limitations 
and thereby leaves behind rationality and engages in an experience of tran-
scendence.33 This reasoning does not seem to convince Michael, as he takes 
his own life a few days later. Driven by feelings of guilt, Toller increasingly 
adopts Michael’s position and begins to interpret the ecological catastrophe 
theologically, as a result of sinful actions. Before Michael’s suicide, Toller 
learns from Mary that Michael has hidden an explosive belt in the base-
ment. He later takes it home, along with Michael’s laptop and documents. 
The pastor soon comes into conflict with Edward Balq, an entrepreneur who 
is financing the renovation of the First Reformed Church. Balq criticizes the 
pastor for allowing the climate activist’s funeral to be staged as a political 
event in a polluted area – the church choir sing Neil Young’s protest song 
“Who’s Gonna Stand Up and Save the Earth” from the 2014 Storytone album. 
While trawling through Michael’s computer, Toller learns that Balq Indus-
tries is ranked fifth in the hundred that make up the “World’s Top Polluters”. 
The viewer’s suspicion that Toller is planning a suicide assassination of Balq 
is confirmed towards the end of the film when he puts on the explosive belt 
just before the inauguration of the newly renovated church.
The consequences of human actions during the Anthropocene are ad-
dressed in First Reformed by using symbols, motifs, and rhetorical patterns 
that are an integral part of Christian language. Catastrophe is looming on 
33 As for the concept of “leap of faith” see Evans 2006, 3–29.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 27
two levels: the destruction of nature by humans and Toller’s self-destruction 
through excessive alcohol consumption are the two poles of the same meta-
phor for sinful behavior. To symbolize the corruption of God’s creation, the 
film refers to the Last Supper – Toller breaks the bread and then dips it in the 
whiskey. It is difficult to say whether Schrader uses Christian signs, symbols 
and narrative patterns to metaphorically illuminate the present ecological 
crisis or whether, on the contrary, the thematization of the ecological macro- 
crisis serves only as background and pretext for the protagonist’s existential 
crisis and to relate his attempt to master or process that crisis. Both inter-
pretations are probably correct: the macro and micro crises are the subject 
of the story, so to speak, and should illuminate each other. The reference 
to the rhetoric of sin and forgiveness creates the frame of meaning within 
which the actions of the protagonist and the actions of humankind in gen-
eral illuminate each other.
To what extent is such a medium relevant for the media-ethical examina-
tion of religion? First Reformed is a cultural artifact that takes up religious 
signs and uses them aesthetically and narratively, but can it be directly 
interpreted as religious? In his famous work Transcendental Style in Cinema 
(1972), Paul Schrader expressed his love and fascination for films and direc-
tors who he believed capable of expressing the transcendent through cer-
tain stylistic and dramaturgical features. The fact that First Reformed con-
tains many elements of a cinematic style that Schrader himself described as 
“transcendental” can certainly be interpreted as an indication of a religious 
intent.34 However, this does not mean that the film is necessarily received as 
a religious film and even less is it the case that it is intended exclusively for a 
religious audience. The recipient does not have to be a believer or a member 
of a religious institution to understand the film and to feel addressed by it. 
As soon as one focuses on the diffusion and reception of the film, the rele-
vant question is not so much whether the religious semiotics and narrative 
used in it are also interpreted religiously, but rather what they do or how 
they relate to a specific cultural and discursive formation. First Reformed 
clearly addresses the anxiety of the contemporary public concerning the 
climate crisis and uses religious signs, figures, and narrative patterns to 
problematize the way individuals and communities deal with that crisis. As 
a discursive practice within the discursive formulation of the climate crisis 
debate, the film uses religious language to highlight the moral implications 
34 See Schrader 2018; Scolari 2021.
28 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
Fig. 5: Tweet by J. K. Rowling 
criticizing the use of the term 
“people who menstruate” rather 
than “women”. Screenshot.
of the debate: Who is responsible for the climate crisis? And how should 
we deal with this responsibility? The film’s performative force – that is, its 
ability to appeal to the public and to demand a moral positioning – lies in 
the fact that it does not present religious worldviews as the solution to the 
climate change problem, but rather uses religious language to frame the 
problem in one certain way rather than another.
“People who Menstruate” – Or, On the Need to  
Teach Media Ethics
Why Teach Media Ethics?
On 6 June 2020, British author J. K. Rowling posted a tweet in which she 
criticized the definition “people who menstruate” as a synonym for women 
in a campaign by Devex, a connective media platform for the global devel-
opment community (fig. 5). Her tweet stated, “‘People who menstruate?’ 
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 29
Fig. 6: Reaction to J. K. Rowling’s  
tweet, pointing out that 
“women” does not mean 
the same as “people who 
menstruate”. Screenshot.
I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. 
Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”
Reactions to this tweet were immediate, and even though there were 
positive responses, many were not at all sympathetic. Rowling was labelled 
“transphobic” or a “TERF” (Trans-exclusionary radical feminist), while other 
tweets highlighted that the ability to menstruate is not exclusively female 
(fig. 6)
The heated discussion on Twitter led to other statements by Rowling, who 
tried to explain why she – as a long-standing feminist – thinks it important 
not to erase the concept of sex in light of the continuing worldwide sup-
pression of female and trans people by male power and violence.35 GLAAD, 
an American organization that highlights defamatory coverage of LGBTQIA+ 
people, also took up the discussion on social media, stating, “JK Rowling 
continues to align herself with an ideology which willfully distorts facts 
about gender identity and people who are trans. In 2020, there is no excuse 
35 J. K. Rowling on 7 June 2020 on Twitter, https://bit.ly/3NT8Exk [accessed 10 January 2021].
30 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
for targeting trans people.”36 Even though Rowling published an essay on 
10 June 2020 on her home page presenting her reasons for her position and 
expressing her sympathy for trans people,37 the public debate continued.
Because of Rowling’s celebrity, journalists from all over the world picked 
up the controversy immediately and made it known to people who were not 
necessarily active on social media. Whether these articles were descriptive 
or provided commentary, this media coverage always contained a specific 
moral or political standpoint: “Where J. K. Rowling’s Transphobia Comes 
from”38 or “Feminists Like J.K: Rowling Struggle with the Transgender Move-
ment, but They Should Not Be Silenced”.39
The debate soon was used as a teaser for political or ideological discus-
sions on gender, sex, and LGBTQIA+. Actors from the Harry Potter films 
felt forced to take up a public stance, and publishing houses, intellectuals, 
and politicians joined the debate with various objectives: some tried to save 
their own reputations, others explained gender concepts or warned of a 
cancel culture.
Since 6 June 2020 media coverage of the Harry Potter-author has usually 
been linked to transphobia, gender debates, or radical feminism even when 
that debate is not relevant to the story at hand.
Why have we chosen to recount here the story of a well-known author 
whose public statement was interpreted variously by a range of (social) me-
dia users and producers? Because it is a perfect vehicle for teaching media 
ethics!
If we accept art historian Hans Belting’s proposal that “We live with 
images. We comprehend the world with images”,40 media ethics should be 
a vital discipline, taught as early as in secondary school. In a mediatized 
world – for Belting “image” is not just a picture on the wall but also encom-
passes mental and virtual images – it is essential we can read and evaluate 
media content critically. Understanding how media devices function is not 
the same as being media literate. As highlighted above, different norms reg-
ulate form and content according to the media format, its technical specifi-
36 GLAAD on 7 June 2020 on Twitter, https://bit.ly/3LJ5P04 [accessed 10 January 2021].
37 J. K. Rowling, 10 June 2020, on her home page jkrowling.com, https://bit.ly/3uqGNx7 [ac-
cessed 10 January 2021].
38 Robertson 2020.
39 Goward 2020.
40 Belting 2011, 9.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 31
cations, and the target audience. The same content may be considered and 
valued in absolutely different ways.
Teaching media ethics is about instruction in how to critically engage 
mediated acts in their specific contexts of production, distribution, and 
reception, and in how to recognize that these mediated acts impact individ-
uals and society by transmitting specific norms and values. It is not about 
passing categorical verdicts or practicing censorship, but about reflecting 
on the ethical dimensions of media content as a cultural product. Thus, a 
discourse on the ethics of media necessarily includes an analysis of values 
and responsibilities. As the discussion above has made evident, questions 
about who shows what, why, how, when, and to whom, or about what per-
ceivers expect from specific media formats must be posed in exploring the 
production values of content and form and in understanding the perceivers’ 
expectations and reactions. Furthermore, today we are all potential produc-
ers of media content, for we use social or digital media as a platform for 
communicating our opinions, to comment on diverse issues, or to search for 
knowledge and orientation. So, how we communicate through social media 
and other media and how that communication shapes our perceptions of 
the world also need critical examination.
The field of media ethics is broad and complex and contains a range of 
possible starting points, which makes case studies all the more useful. Media 
ethics, a so-called applied ethics, is essentially practical, because it is about 
rethinking and evaluating mediatized norms, roles, and institutions that 
regulate our everyday lives, and about adjusting idealized moral principles 
for daily practice.41 Using a case study such as the “Rowling controversy”, 
we can highlight the diverse dimensions of a media ethics’ approach and 
instruct students in how to think critically and express their evaluations 
cogently.
“What Do We See?” – Reading the Representation
The first step in approaching J. K. Rowling’s tweet in response to a global 
hygiene campaign is to look at it in detail, in other words to undertake a 
close reading of the image and the language. In the original tweet, Rowling 
comments on the title of an article. Image and text in the original tweet are 
not obviously linked: the image depicts a campaigner showing a flipbook to 
41 See Schicha/Brosda 2010, 11; Ward 2021, 3–7.
32 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
a mixed-sex audience sitting in a circle somewhere outdoors. The setting 
looks very basic and rural, all those depicted are people of color. The actual 
text refers to the title of an article that highlights the importance of the 
campaign. The campaign itself is not the subject of Rowling’s comment; 
she reacts to the use of the term “people who menstruate” with a satirical 
suggestion of alternative expressions for “people who menstruate” – “Wum-
ben”, “Wimpund”, and “Woomud”.
An analysis of the tweet’s representation immediately raises several 
ethical questions: Why does Rowling not directly criticize the use of the 
inclusive term “people who menstruate”? What is the effect of the satire? 
How do comment and image interplay? Do the suggested terms raise spe-
cific connotations? Say “Wumben” aloud and we have a sound like “dumb”; 
“Wimpund” may be linked to “wimp”, and “Woomud” to “mud” – a term 
Rowling deploys in her Harry Potter series when those with magical powers 
speak in a derogatory way of wizards and witches with a non-magic family 
background as “mudbloods”. Is Rowling – on a meta level – criticizing a glob-
al development organization for promoting inclusive language in a highly 
heteronormative and exclusive society, where the patriarchal hierarchy and 
traditional gender roles are omnipresent, and diversity is still in its infancy? 
The image of the campaign give raise to such an assumption for it clearly 
refers to a rural and traditional African community.
This close reading of the actual representation is a first step in a herme-
neutical approach to a cultural product that presupposes the interpreter’s 
awareness of their own cultural imprint and expectations. Academic engage-
ment with a tweet, a widely accessible source, may heighten sensibilities for 
critical readings of representations of every kind and for the interpreter’s 
own handling of sources. This initial approach may lead to a subjective inter-
pretation and possibly to a positioning in relation to the representation and 
the related debates. To advance an argument or position themselves in an 
existing debate, the students need to know more about the context of a rep-
resentation such as the Rowling tweet. So, the question that should deter-
mine the next step should be, Who produced the artifact we are discussing?
“Who Published What?” – The Producer’s Background
The producer of the tweet is, as we have noted, J. K. Rowling. She is the 
author of the Harry Potter series. She knows how to write; she is a profes-
sional. She is involved with several charity organizations that focus on alle-
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 33
Fig. 7: Rowling’s tweet from 19 
December 2019 in which she 
supported Maya Forstater’s 
view on sex. Screenshot.
viating social deprivation for children, single-parent families, and women.42 
Rowling’s philanthropic focus may be explained by her past experiences, for 
she was herself a single parent. Since her success as an author has given 
her a public voice, she has advocated for female empowerment and gender 
equality. To publish her opinions, she has used different media, such as in-
terviews with magazines or newspapers as well as speeches or social media. 
She was fully aware of what she was doing when she posted the tweet. To 
establish whether the reaction was unexpected, we can turn to the respons-
es to Rowling’s earlier posts or likes.
In December 2019 Rowling had voiced her support for a female research-
er who had lost her job due to her gender critical views.43 In her tweet 
Rowling had stated, “Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you 
like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in 
peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is 
42 Rowling established the Volant Trust, https://www.volanttrust.org/about-us/; co-founded 
Lumos, https://www.wearelumos.org/; and is president of Gingerbread, https://www.
gingerbread.org.uk/.
43 Gallagher 2019.
34 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
Fig. 8: Comment on Rowling’s 
tweet wherein she supports 
Maya Forstater. Screenshot.
real?” (fig. 7). This tweet insisting that sex is a biological fact had sparked 
harsh criticism, and not only from trans-community activists. Rowling was 
accused of being transphobic and of denying trans people’s rights. The dis-
cussion thus changed focus, from a genuine tweet on the essence of gender, 
sex, and gender inequality to a heated debate on transphobia, trans people’s 
rights, and radical (and thus discriminatory) feminism. Some comments 
explicitly referred to the power of a person like Rowling in the public space 
and highlighted the responsibility that comes with that power (fig. 8).
Rowling would therefore have been prepared for a heated discussion 
when she posted her tweet on 6 June 2020. Again, in reaction to expressions 
of outrage, to the so-called shitstorm that followed, she generated several 
clarifying tweets. This did not stop the accusations, so she published an 
essay on the issue on her website, avoiding the limitations of Twitter as a 
concise message service.
A scholar of media ethics might ask about the impact of her feminist 
background on this controversy. Why did she react to this specific headline 
with a satirical tweet? Why did she feel that inclusive language threatened 
women’s position within society? What kind of (feminist) perspective does 
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 35
her tweet express? What values did the tweet communicate? What role did 
Rowling’s renown play here? Why did she choose Twitter as the medium in 
which to publish her critique?
When we contextualize the representation within the producer’s back-
ground, new questions arise concerning responsibilities and values. Fur-
thermore, a specific position within the debate may be gained by following 
the producer’s argumentation and by evaluating its consistency. Also, the 
choice of Twitter as means of communication becomes important when we 
try to contextualize the representation and to evaluate its meaning and the 
values and norms it communicates.
“Twitter, the Megaphone of a Global Community?!” –  
The Ways of Distribution
Rowling’s tweet was immediately commented upon by a multitude of Twit-
ter-users and organizations, and, somewhat later, through other channels 
by journalists and intellectuals. A tweet about inclusive language became 
a morally charged public discussion about social inclusion, equality, and 
power structures.
To choose Twitter to criticize inclusive language is to likely trigger dis-
cussion, because this microblogging service aims to provoke immediate re-
actions. Twitter is used to spread global or regional news, promote specific 
devices or articles or companies, and to communicate informally. The lim-
itation to 280 characters for a tweet forces the user to write in a compact 
form. An explanation of an earlier statement may require several tweets. 
Pointed or even polemic statements are thus common, provided not only 
by “private” users (in the sense of non-economic or non-marketing tweets), 
but also by “public persons” like politicians, news anchors, scientists, in-
tellectuals, organizations’ agents, or celebrities from the entertainment 
industry. On Twitter the lines between the private and the public persona 
often blur. Donald Trump – to just name one prominent agent – used Twitter 
to provide users with his political views and agenda and with his personal 
opinions.44 Twitter became a prominent political media during Trump’s 
presidency, used not just by Trump,45 but also by protesters and political 
44 See e. g. Keith 2016; Ecker/Jetter/Lewandowsky 2020; Gambino 2021.
45 Andrews 2020.
36 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
communities, for whom Twitter was a means to spread news and opinions 
and to organize gatherings and demonstrations. 
In the space of social media much is allowed and restrictions are few. The 
Twitter regulative system46 specifies a code of conduct, but in practice, the 
administrators need the help of the users to find a potential breach of the 
rules – more than 330 million people are users. Unless the system’s adminis-
trators detect a violation of the rules, nothing will happen.
In Rowling’s case, using Twitter meant reaching her 14 million followers. 
Many of them probably follow her because they like her books; others, be-
cause they know her philanthropic work; some, because she is famous – the 
motives are many. In addressing a subject that is the object of much con-
troversial discussion, Rowling must have calculated on high user activity. 
Furthermore, issues related to trans identities, gender norms, and LGBTQIA+ 
tend to reach a relatively young, social media-savvy audience. Why did she 
want to launch this discussion on Twitter? Why not write a novel or an 
essay?
From a media ethics perspective, the question is not whether Rowling, 
particularly when so famous, should be allowed to post this kind of state-
ment on a social media channel such as Twitter; it is rather about why she 
chose to do so and whom she reached. The moment in which she posted 
the statement should also be assessed. Did she do so as part of a marketing 
strategy three months before she published the next installment in her Cor-
moran Strike crime novel series? 47 We should also note that Rowling chose 
her website and not Twitter as the location for her explanation. Did the 
user comments and critical media reaction to her tweet force her to write 
an emotionally charged essay, which in turn required her to change media?
Analyzing the media a producer uses to distribute a specific message re-
quires us to think about the target audience, the range of influence of the 
specific media, as well the limitations of the media’s form. On a meta level 
one can also revisit the impact and power of social media.
46 Twitter rules and policies can be found at https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies.
47 Interestingly, in the Cormoran Strike novel Troubled Blood, one villain dresses as a woman 
to deceive his victims. But he is not, as the novel highlights, a trans person, but a master 
of deceit. We can muse about that characterization.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 37
“Just Shut Up” – The Perception Level
With Twitter as the medium, reactions to Rowling’s tweet were pointed and 
often subjective, and at the debate’s climax the comments became threat-
ening and transgressing.48 It was no longer a matter of contradicting or con-
vincing; the debate became personal and very emotional. There were reso-
nances with the witch hunts of the early modern period, when the wrong 
word in the wrong ear could lead to public accusation and execution. It is 
striking that even professionals such as journalists now approached Row-
ling and her complete work from a particular perspective. Several reviews 
of the next Cormoran Strike novel made reference to Rowling’s tweet and 
the assumption that she is transphobic.49 Up to today, the media coverage 
of Rowling – independent of its political slant – has continued to tend to link 
the author with trigger terms such as trans community, radical feminist, 
and denier of gender theory, even if the news being covered has absolutely 
nothing to do with these issues. The discussion Rowling launched will prob-
ably adhere to her for a long time yet.
Crucially, we must note that the discussion was never about the advan-
tages and disadvantages of inclusive language, as Rowling’s tweet suggest-
ed, but focused only on the author’s potential transphobia. The limitations 
and fast dissemination of social media make it a space almost impossible 
to control, particularly when the debate is around such a controversial is-
sue. As Judith Butler noted in an interview, “The quickness of social media 
allows for forms of vitriol that do not exactly support thoughtful debate. 
We need to cherish the longer forms.”50 The rules of conversation, which in-
volve listening (here reading) attentively, thinking about the argument, and 
replying constructively, obviously do not work in this context. The speed of 
the response is crucial here. Several hashtags that libeled or threatened the 
author were created and are still active. 
Negative user comments ranged from declarations of delusion to accu-
sations of ignorance to the issuing of threats; positive comments supported 
Rowling’s concept of femaleness by biology or by decision. This was not a 
conversation as usually understood: it was not about trying to understand 
the other person’s opinion but about denouncing that opinion. Rowling her-
48 The picture is easily acquired by following the thread on Twitter.
49 See e. g. Kolirin 2020; Haynes 2020.
50 Ferber 2020.
38 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
self has pointed out this character. Freedom of speech and opinion, as it is 
intended in the Twitter policies, looks different one might think. Some jour-
nals and magazines have at least used the tweet as a starting point for care-
ful analysis and commentary on gender, sex, and transition, on trans peo-
ple’s rights and gender hierarchies. They have tried to show the complexity 
of the issue and both sides of the discussion. Famous voices subsequently 
condemned the type of public outrage that leads to a sort of censorship, 
applied to someone who does not agree with a public statement. As we have 
seen, the consequences of this Twitter debate did not remain in this specific 
space, for it also touched other areas of social life: people dissociated them-
selves from Rowling or from the concepts she defended; schools renamed 
houses in order to distance them from the author; and Rowling does not 
appear in the anniversary documentary Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: 
Return to Hogwarts (Casey Patterson / Joe Pearlman / Eran Creevy / Gior-
gio Testi, UK/US 2021), available for streaming since 1 January 2022.
An analysis of the tweet and how it was perceived makes evident that 
conversations on social media follow other rules than in real life, for there 
is much room for misunderstanding and the response time is brief. We are 
able to see the effect of social media on the formation of opinion and also 
how “news bubbles” can discard any opinion that does not correspond 
with the views of a specific community. We need to ask questions such as, 
How would I react to a tweet like this? Why would I react? What are my 
responsibilities as a user or perceiver? And on a meta level: Is a fruitful and 
respectful discussion on social media possible? What would be its premises? 
What are we to make of cancel culture and what does freedom of speech 
encompass?
Media ethics is hardly a dry theoretical topic. When it is addressed in 
the classroom, students are encouraged to think critically and to rethink 
media practices, to take on responsibility as receivers, and also as potential 
producers, not only in an academic context but also in everyday life. It is im-
portant school pupils and university students understand how and why val-
ues and norms are established, legitimized, and challenged through media 
transmission. Media ethics provides theoretical and methodological tools 
that can be deployed in the scholarly investigation of media representa-
tions, knowledge that can then be transferred to everyday situations.
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 39
Bibliography
Andrews Travis M., 2020, Commander in Tweets. The Dispatches that Define the 
Trump Presidency, The Washington Post, 14 October 2020, https://is.gd/reVaCu 
[accessed 18 January 2022].
Aufderheide, Patricia, 2007, Documentary Film: A Very Short Introduction. New York: 
Oxford University Press.
Belting, Hans, 2011, An Anthropology of Images. Picture, Medium, Body, translated by 
Thomas Dunlap, Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Bondolfi, Sibilla, 2021, Schweizer Stimmvolk sagt Ja zu Burka-Verbot, SWI swissinfo.ch, 
7 March 2021, https://is.gd/QYVlHl [accessed 20 January 2022].
Christians, Clifford G. / Fackler, Mark / McKee, Kathy Brittain / Kreshel, Peggy J., 
2020, Media Ethics: Cases and Moral Reasoning, New York: Routledge, 11th edition, 
doi.org/10.4324/9780429282249.
Ecker, Ullrich / Jetter, Michael / Lewandowsky, Stephan, 2020, How Trump Uses Twit-
ter to Distract the Media, The Conversation, 12 November 2020, https://is.gd/i4I1VP 
[accessed 18 January 2022].
Evans, C. Stephen, 2006, Kierkegaard on Faith and the Self. Collected Essays. Waco, TX: 
Baylor University Press.
Ferber, Alona, 2020, Judith Butler on the Culture Wars, JK Rowling and Living in “Anti- 
intellectual Times”, The New Statesman, UK edition, 22 September 2020, https://
is.gd/kiKn20 [accessed 18 January 2022].
Fischer, Tereza, 2015, Graphic Novel: der Bechdel-Test, Filmbulletin: Zeitschrift für 
Film und Kino 57, 1 November 2015, 16–17.
Foucault, Michel, 2013, Analytik der Macht, edited by Daniel Defert and François Ewald, 
Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Fritz, Natalie / Höpflinger, Anna-Katharina / Mäder, Marie-Therese / Pezzoli-Olgiati, 
Daria / Knauss, Stefanie, 2018, Sichtbare Religion: eine Einführung in die Religions­
wissenschaft, Berlin: De Gruyter.
Funiok, Rüdiger, 2011, Medienethik: Verantwortung in der Mediengesellschaft, Stutt-
gart: Kohlhammer, 2nd edition.
Funiok, Rüdiger, 2010, Medienreligiosität. Religiosität als anthropologische Dimen-
sion und ihre medienvermittelten Formen, in: Pietrass, Manuela / Funiok, Rüdi-
ger, Mensch und Medien. Philosophische uns Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, 
Wiesbaben: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 179–202.
Gallagher, Sophie, 2019, JK Rowling Defends Woman who Lost Employment Tribu-
nal over Transgender Tweets, The Independent, 19 December 2019, https://is.gd/
L8jWyW [accessed 16 January 2022].
Gambino, Lauren, 2021, Trump Has Lost Twitter, his Biggest Political Megaphone. 
Now What?, The Guardian, 9 January 2021, https://is.gd/iSS9eF [accessed 18 Janu-
ary 2022].
Gilligan, Carol, 2003, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Develop­
ment, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Goward, Prue, 2020, Feminists Like J. K. Rowling Struggle with the Transgender 
Movement, but They Should Not Be Silenced, The Sidney Morning Herald, 11 June 
2020, https://is.gd/SpEqrO [accessed 10 January 2020].
Hall, Stuart, 1979, Culture, the Media and the “Ideological Effect”, in: Curran, James / 
40 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42
Gurevitch, Michael / Wollacott, Janet (eds.), Mass Communication and Society, 
London: Arnold, 315–348.
Hall, Stuart, 2006, Encoding/Decoding, in: Scott, John (ed.), Documentary Research, 
vol. 1, London: SAGE, 233–246.
Hall, Stuart, 2013, Introduction, in: Hall, Stuart / Evans, Jessica / Nixon, Sean (eds.), 
Representation: Cultural Representation and Signifying Practices, Los Angeles: SAGE, 
xvii–xxvi.
Hall Stuart, 2013, The Work of Representation, in: Hall, Stuart / Evans, Jessica / Nixon, 
Sean (eds.), Representation: Cultural Representation and Signifying Practices, Los 
Angeles: SAGE, 1–47.
Haynes, Suyin, 2020, ‘More Fuel to the Fire.’ Trans and Non-Binary Authors Respond 
to Controversy over J. K. Rowling’s New Novel, TIME, 15 September 2020, https://
is.gd/Yvzq8z [accessed 18 January 2022].
Heesen, Jessica, 2016, Einleitung, in: Heesen, Jessica (ed.), Handbuch Medien­ und In­
formationsethik, Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler, 1–8, doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05394-7_1.
Keith, Tamara, 2016, Commander-In-Tweet: Trump’s Social Media Use and Presiden-
tial Media Avoidance, NPR, 18 November 2016, https://is.gd/V5g5bD [accessed 18 
January 2022].
Kettner, Matthias, 2011, “Werte und Normen – Praktische Geltungsansprüche von 
Kulturen”, in: Jaeger, Friedrich (ed.), Handbuch der Kulturwissenschaften, Stuttgart: 
Metzler, 219–231.
Kolirin, Lianne, 2020, JK Rowling’s New Book Sparks Fresh Transgender Rights Row, 
CNN, 15 September 2020, https://is.gd/bZTt1B [accessed 18 January 2022].
Lauzen, Martha M., 2021, It’s a Man’s (Celluloid) World: Portrayals of Female Characters 
in the Top Grossing U. S. Films of 2020, Center for the Study of Women in Television 
& Film, https://is.gd/iThFKg [accessed 10 January 2022].
Leschke, Reiner, 2001, Einführung in die Medienethik, München: Wilhelm Fink.
Lövheim, Mia / Lynch, Gordon, 2011, The Mediatisation of Religion Debate: An Intro-
duction, Culture and Religion 12, 2, 111–117.
Mäder, Marie-Therese, 2020, Mormon Lifestyles: Communicating Religion and Ethics in 
Documentary Media, Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Mäder, Marie-Therese / Soto-Sanfiel, María T., 2019, “We Are Open-Minded, Tolerant, 
and Care for Other People”: Comparing Audience Responses to Religion in Docu-
mentaries, Journal of Media and Religion 18, 3, 98–114.
Marchart, Oliver, 2003, Warum Cultural Studies vieles sind, aber nicht alles. Zum 
Kultur- und Medienbegriff der Cultural Studies, Medienheft Dossier 19, 7–14.
Morris, Anne M. / Katzman, Debra K., 2003, The Impact of the Media on Eating 
Disorders in Children and Adolescents, Paediatrics & Child Health 8, 5, 287–289; 
doi.org/10.1093/pch/8.5.287.
Pezzoli-Olgiati, Daria, 2015, Religion in Cultural Imaginaries. Setting the Scene, in: 
Pezzoli-Olgiati, Daria (ed.), Religion in Cultural Imaginaries. Explorations in Visual 
and Material Practices, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 9–38.
Potter, Ralph B., 1972, The Logic of Moral Argument, in: Deats, Paul (ed.), Toward a 
Discipline of Social Ethics: Essays in Honor of Walter George Muelder, Boston: Boston 
University Press, 93–114.
Robertson, Grace, 2020, Where J. K. Rowling’s Transphobia Comes From, Vanity Fair, 
12 June 2020, https://is.gd/eSZtAy [accessed 10 January 2022].
www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42 “Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Women! | 41
Schicha, Christian / Brosda, Carsten, 2010, Handbuch Medienethik, Wiesbaden: VS.
Schrader, Paul, 2018, Transcendental Style in Film: Ozu, Bresson, Dreyer, Oakland: Uni-
versity of California Press.
Scolari, Baldassare, 2021, Wie Filme uns helfen können, die Klimakrise zu verstehen. 
Versuch über Paul Schraders First Reformed und Benedikt Erlingssons Woman 
at War, in: Plüss, David / Scheuter, Sabine (eds.), Gott in der Klimakrise. Heraus­
forderungen für Theologie und Kirche, Zürich: TVZ, 47–59.
Unknown author 2021, Diese Frauen sagen JA zum Verhüllungsverbot, SVP­Klartext: 
Die Zeitung der Schweizerischen Volkspartei, February 2021, https://is.gd/OVXrhP 
[accessed 19 January 2022].
Veith, Werner / Bohrmann, Thomas / Reichelt, Matthias, 2018, Einleitung: Warum 
der Film auch ein Gegenstand der Ethik ist, in: Bohrmann, Thomas / Reichelt, 
Matthias / Veith, Werner, Angewandte Ethik und Film, Wiesbaden: Springer, 
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-20391-7_1.
Ward, Stephen J. A., 2021, Ethics and the Media. An Introduction, Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Zuboff, Shoshana, 2019, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. The Fight for a Human Fu­
ture at the New Frontier of Power, New York: Public Affairs.
Filmography
First Reformed (Paul Schrader, US 2019).
Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return to Hogwarts (Casey Patterson, Joe 
Pearlman, Eran Creevy and Giorgio Testi, UK/US 2021).
42 | Natalie Fritz, Marie-Therese Mäder, and Baldassare Scolari www.jrfm.eu 2022, 8/1, 11–42