Nathan Schneider
US journalist and political scientist, specialising in online communities
Nathan Schneider (born 1984) is an American scholar and former journalist, who specializes in economic justice in the online economy. Since 2015, he has been a professor of media studies at the University of Colorado Boulder.
Writing on religion
Much of Schneider's early work concerned the interrelation of religion, science, and politics, which grew out of his academic work in religious studies. He has written investigative articles on the John Templeton Foundation for The Nation and The Chronicle of Higher Education. With the support of a Knight Grant for Reporting on Religion and American Public Life through USC's Annenberg School, he did extensive reporting on the evangelical Christian philosopher and debater William Lane Craig, which resulted in articles that appeared in Commonweal, The Chronicle of Higher Education, and Killing the Buddha.
His first book, God in Proof: The Story of a Search from the Ancients to the Internet is a history of proofs for and against the existence of God, as well as a memoir of his own conversion to Catholicism as a teenager. A starred review in Booklist said, "Schneider makes an often dry subject quite companionable." In Religion Dispatches, Gordon Haber wrote, "Schneider defines the next generation of public intellectuals—fiercely articulate, indefatigably curious and Internet-savvy."
Schneider's writing on religion often deals with neglected traditions of political radicalism. Schneider's profile of literary critic Elaine Scarry for The Chronicle of Higher Education, for instance, compared her scholarship with the religious anti-nuclear movement. In 2014 Al Jazeera America published his story of a Catholic nun with a secret ministry to the transgender community, which was applauded by Buzzfeed and The Advocate.
In 2014, he was named a columnist for America, a national Catholic weekly.
The public source identifies “Nathan Schneider” as uS journalist and political scientist, specialising in online communities. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Nathan, Schneider and journalist.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Nathan Schneider”, the useful work is to connect “uS journalist and political scientist, specialising in online communities” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The entry’s evidential value lies in the named roles, institutions and publications that can be tested against primary documentation. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 17, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q16751930. VIAF identifies the subject as 259221522. The Library of Congress control number is n2012053233. 2 of 4 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1984, 2015 and 2014.
Public reputation and documentary evidence do not always develop together; absence from a summary is not evidence of historical absence. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Nathan Schneider”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Nathan Schneider primary sources, Nathan Schneider archive and Nathan research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Nathan Schneider”?
- Which primary records establish identity, chronology and institutional ties?
- Which claims depend on a single source or contested interpretation?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Nathan Schneider” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.