Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis study compares the agenda‐setting cues of traditional media alongside those of online media in general and social media in particular. The main line of inquiry concerns (a) whether people posting content to openly accessible social media outlets may be acting in response to mainstream news coverage, possibly as a "corrective" to perceived imbalances in that coverage, or (b) whether such posts seem to have influenced professional media coverage of the issue, possibly reflecting broader opinion dynamics. We do not view these as competing hypotheses, as this relationship may run in both directions and shift at different points in the evolution of an issue. Our goal is to establish important preliminary findings by addressing these questions in the context of a particular issue that is (a) prominently covered in professional media, and (b) contentious enough to inspire individuals to "take the media into their own hands" by producing and publishing their own "coverage." Proposition 8 in California, which amended the state constitution to define marriage as the exclusive right of opposite‐sex couples, provides this context. Our analysis focuses on the thousands of videos posted to YouTube and coverage of Proposition 8 in professional news media, tracing the relationships among them.

Li sees through the media's white noise on the issue of same sex marriage to discover that opponents of Proposition 8 often made claims about the past to sway public perception. These arguments were based on claims evoking a historical sense of the institution of marriage, but to a certain extent they were untrue. This book attempts to dispel some of the misperceptions around the concept of marriage in a historical context. Li also shows that homosexual and heterosexual couples are not exactly the same, and marriage is differently understood. She goes above and beyond merely explicating how th.

On November 4, 2008, the majority of California's electorate supported a ban on same-sex marriage. Anecdotal evidence attributes its passage to increased turnout among black and Latino voters. This article determines whether this was so; it also examines whether blacks and Latinos were more likely than whites to oppose same-sex marriage, even when accounting for religiosity and political attitudes. Had black and Latino turnout remained at the same level as in the 2004 presidential election, Proposition 8 would still have passed. Moreover, blacks were more likely to favor a ban on same-sex marriage when compared to whites.

The events that have transpired in the wake of the passage of Prop 8 have raised several important questions that could shed light not only on the current circumstances in California but also on social psychological theory about intersecting social identities (for example, being gay and Black) and social judgments. Ghavami has recently begun a line comprised of three studies. Study 1, Comparing Sexual and Ethnic Minority Perspectives on Same-Sex Marriage, examines how "naive realism" (Robinson et al., 1995) led opponents of Prop 8 to draw erroneous inferences about the rationale underlying the votes cast by the Black voters, thereby fueling hatred and hostility. Study 2 investigates how the events surrounding the passage of Prop 8 have affected Black gay men and lesbians whose Black identity and gay/lesbian identity were challenged. Study 3 looks at how motivation guides an individual's social perception and categorization of individuals with multiple identities.

In Perry v. Brown, the Ninth Circuit held that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. But in doing so, the court stepped back from the breadth of the district court's decision. The Ninth Circuit did not address whether same-sex marriage is a fundamental constitutional right. Nor did the Ninth Circuit address whether the Equal Protection Clause categorically prevents states from limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. Instead, the Ninth Circuit reached the narrow conclusion that Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause because it withdrew a preexisting legal right from a marginalized group without any legitimate purpose. The Ninth Circuit should have held that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits any denial of the right to same-sex marriage, regardless of whether it is withdrawn or withheld. Accordingly, the Supreme Court should affirm the Ninth Circuit, but disregard its reasoning. The Court should instead adopt the district court's reasoning. Part II provides background information on the facts and district court bench trial that led to the Ninth Circuit's decision in Perry. Part III then summarizes and explains the decision. Part IV argues that the U.S. Supreme Court's equal protection jurisprudence does not support the narrowness of the Perry court's holding. Part V concludes.