Education

I didn't see too many outrageous examples in the story. In fact, I'm surprised that it was as balanced as it was.

To the extent that there's a difference, it's because many textbook writers probably see Christians as an ideological enemy- ones they battle on campus, in their classes, on television, etc.- and don't want to encourage them, while they see Muslims as an oppressed minority. It's an almost involuntary reflex in leftists to put the majority "oppressor" culture, as they perceive it, in its place and to protect those whom they consider weaker, creating in their mind a nice, creamy equality.

An example

I covered a history class the other day and took flipped open the textbook. I found that when discussing the spread of Christianity, the textbook gives a secular, psychological explanation that belittles both the faith and the people of the ancient world. According to the textbook, Christianity spread because the people of the time felt despair and needed something to "cling to," to paraphrase our president. This is the "crutch" theory.

Why it's bias

It's presumptuous to think that people felt greater despair then than now. A more non-biased, academic approach would have been to quote the contemporary sources, whom, I'm sure, would have felt that their acceptance of Christianity was a sincere one. Or, it could have just reported the facts with no commentary at all.