Detecting Media Bias
Teresa Liles
HUM/114
December 10, 2012
Christopher Page

Detecting Media Bias
Same-sex marriage has been an on-going battle for many years. California’s opposition to same-sex marriage, Proposition 8, barely passed in the 2008 election. Same-sex marriage has been a news-worthy topic since 1997 when Hawaii passed a Domestic Partnership policy which triggered other states to change policies as well. This issue started a state-to-state debate of whether same-sex couples should have the same rights that heterosexual, married couples have. This debate between states has reached a Congressional level. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases surrounding this on-going debate. The cases the Court will hear are related to allowable benefits for same-sex partners, and California’s ban on gay marriage.
The New York Times’ article about the Supreme Court taking up the same-sex marriage issue was clear and accurate. There were good statistics about states’ involvements in the on-going debate. There were hyper-links to other topics related to this article such as Social Security benefits, estate taxes, Proposition 8, and domestic partnerships in specific states. The facts that were reported in this New York Times’ article were specific and detailed enough to gather the message of the topic being presented. Other facts that support the topic, although not detailed in this report, allow for readers to research further at their own will, using the provided links.
This article regarding the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the argument for same-sex marriage does not cover information outside of the United States. The article does cover statistical information from a few select states that have been in the news surrounding this topic. The alternative perspectives discussed were merely, people are either for same-sex marriage or they are against it. The article did not go into detail about the process of getting to the place of contemplating same-sex marriage laws from where the United States started discussing this issue in the late 1990s when Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which only recognized marriage between a man and a woman.
There were some assumptions made by the opponents of the law, who want the Supreme Court to uphold the law. They side with the states that ban same-sex marriage and continue to believe that marriage as a legal union, is only between a man and a woman. Other assumptions come from the fact that support for our President is favorable and because he supports equality in the eyes of the law, that others will follow suit. The article discussed a lot of “what could happen” depending on the outcome of the up-coming case and which way the court decides to rule.
There are always at least two sides to every story. When evaluating a topic, one needs to be careful of personal bias. Being open-minded so that one can evaluate the information based on facts and not opinions is a responsibility. Making distinctions between the level of importance of an article is tricky. Checking alternative sources is fine for research but to believe that everything one reads on the Internet or in news media is truth, can be very dangerous. Considering the source before making a distinction of truth versus fiction is necessary. Some topics are more serious than others; some are purely for entertainment purposes. Being a critical evaluator is very important because what some might think is a fluffy topic, not even newsworthy, might have the ability to change another’s life. The Supreme Court has the ability to impact changes that could affect society as a whole. It is their responsibility to weigh all of the facts. Social barriers have been crossed before and in June we should know if they have been breached again.

References