I'd say hype does impact how one views a book, when one is aware of it. Wikipedia cites his statement in an interview with the Humanist Network News (though their link is dead) that Narnia is "religious propaganda" so the two statements between them lead me to believe that, whatever Narnia is or isn't, Pullmans very similarly styled work revolving around a church built on malevolence, bitterness and ignorance is ANTI-Christian propaganda. Apologetics is nothing new, nor is apologetics in the form of allegory; Pilgrims Progress did it, and Dante. The difference is no one felt obligated to rebutt them in the same style and call it original fiction.

Closest I can come to a source for the second statement is this:

"The Golden Compass Author Avoids Atheist Labels" (Humanist Network News Interview). Humanist Network News. http://humaniststudies.org/enews/?id=326&article=1. Retrieved 2008-12-01. ^ Crary, Duncan.

The quote in the subject line is from Pullman speaking to the Washington Post:

^ a b Wartofsky, Alona (2001-02-19). "The Last Word". The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A23371-2001Feb18?. Retrieved 2007-11-29.

I doubt very seriously I could read this series and separate the hype from the prose. Without the former I would probably see an indictment of much of many church heirarchies, but against the backdrop of what I've read about the author, including his own public statements, and his other book, "The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ" it would be impossible. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not....