Cason's+Page


 * = = T h e S a m e -S e x M a rr i a g <span style="color: rgb(28, 69, 176);">e <span style="color: rgb(11, 11, 208);">D <span style="color: rgb(155, 88, 223);">e <span style="color: rgb(189, 227, 125);">b <span style="color: rgb(246, 210, 132);">a <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">t <span style="color: rgb(213, 137, 240);">e =

//Can gay rights activists use recent momentum to further their cause or will family values advocates turn the tide?//
|| <span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> In the past few weeks, gay rights activists have had success in pushing legislation and judicial action legalizing same-sex marriage in three states, expanding the grand total to 5. Numerous other states, especially in the Northeast, have initiated or are currently considering gay marriage legislation. This issue is controversial, because many "family values" advocates strongly oppose expanding the definition of traditional marriage between a man and a woman to include same sex couples. ||
 * = ===A Little Background Info...===
 * = =<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif;">__**EXAMPLE ONE**__ = ||
 * = ===Mainstream Media Coverage=== ||
 * = =//Fox News://=

media type="youtube" key="Xq2kLf1NXt8" height="505" width="640"
<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255);">__Glenn Beck (First Video):__
 * -from a cable news channel: Fox
 * -talking head, opinion-based quasi-news show
 * -not based on any one event, wholly opinion
 * -claims that "you can't make an intellectually honest argument against this" when you //can//...he just //doesn't//
 * -woman being interviewed cannot see props
 * -meant to provoke outrage, i.e. sensationalism
 * -tries to connect two totally different idea: gay marriage and polygamy, in order to achieve an emotional response
 * -uses visual tools to demonstrate this "connection"
 * -tries to get Jenny Block to make broad generalizations about GLBTQ people

media type="file" key="cason2.mov"

//From Out Magazine's Power 50 2009//

Yes, there really is a queer cabal in the Eastern elite media, and it works on West 43rd Street in New York City. Style editor Tonchi, style reporter Wilson, assistant managing editor Berke, national correspondent Nagourney, and advertising columnist Elliot can set agendas in their areas of expertise. In the case of restaurant critic Bruni and theater critic Brantley, the fate of fledgling enterprises rests in their hands. This is one group you don’t want to run into in a dark alley."
 * "7 //The New York Times// Gay Mafia Richard Berke, Ben Brantley, Frank Bruni, Stuart Elliot, Adam Nagourney, Stefano Tonchi, Eric Wilson**

[|"Gay Mafia" (Second Video):] = = =//[|The Huffington Post:]//=
 * -uses loaded language, such as "gay mafia" and "agenda driven media" that have negative connotations
 * -asserts that gay issues are "elite issues"
 * -stems from a one paragraph description on Out Magazine's Power 50 (see above)
 * -the women in the video favor gay side; men disagree
 * -men, representing conservative view, talk over liberal women, overwhelming them
 * -connects a pop-culture allusion into an argument over gay marriage, all under the headline "gay mafia" ||
 * = ===Citizen Media Coverage=== ||

"SAVANNAH, Ga. — Republicans can reach a broader base by recasting gay marriage as an issue that could dent pocketbooks as small businesses spend more on health care and other benefits, GOP Chairman Michael Steele said Saturday. Steele said that was just an example of how the party can retool its message to appeal to young voters and minorities without sacrificing core conservative principles. Steele said he used the argument weeks ago while chatting on a flight with a college student who described herself as fiscally conservative but socially liberal on issues like gay marriage. "Now all of a sudden I've got someone who wasn't a spouse before, that I had no responsibility for, who is now getting claimed as a spouse that I now have financial responsibility for," Steele told Republicans at the state convention in traditionally conservative Georgia. "So how do I pay for that? Who pays for that? You just cost me money." " //[|Read rest of article here...]//

<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255);"> **[|Stuart Whatley: Moral Majority or Immoral Minority?]** One wonders when Republicans are going to figure out how to appeal to people rather than traditions. [|Lincoln Mitchell: Marriage Equality and the New Faces of the Republican Party] **The collapse of the moderate opposition to gay marriage is both partially caused by the right wing of the Republican Party's increasing isolation on the fringes of American politics. ** [|Derrick K. Baker: GOP's Kryptonite Dulls The Man of Steele] **Both Keyes and Steele were played like a violin by GOPers who are searching for ways to remain relevant in voters' eyes without alienating the far right who navigate their ship's rudder.** ||
 * -article from AP wire
 * -lays out story, provides some framework for the news
 * -no substantial ideological bias, presents facts evenly
 * -connects Steele to previous comments (such as the "bling" references) which he's been ridiculed for
 * -centered around a single Steele quote
 * -links to other stories around frame, including three liberal blog article on subject:

=<span class="wiki_link_ext"> //<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="wiki_link_ext">-- [|The Washington Post:]//= <span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> =<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">-- "Gay-Marriage Issue Awaits Court Pick"=
 * = =<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black',Gadget,sans-serif;">**__EXAMPLE TWO__** = ||
 * = ===Mainstream Media Coverage=== ||
 * < <span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">

<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">-- "As President Obama prepares to name his first Supreme Court justice, conservatives in Washington are making clear that his nominee will face plenty of questions during the confirmation process on the legal underpinnings of same-sex marriage. In addition to shedding more light on the nation's most contentious unfolding social drama and legal frontier, Senate Republicans say the debate could provide a road map to an Obama nominee's judicial philosophy. "It may reflect the degree to which they think that they're not bound by the classical meaning of the Constitution, and that they may want to let a personal agenda go beyond what the law said," said [|Sen. Jeff Sessions] (Ala.), the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Questions on social issues in confirmation hearings have tended for the past 30 years to focus squarely on abortion, with partisans from both sides poring over a nominee's writings and rulings and presidents typically denying that any "litmus test" was employed in the selection. Same-sex marriage carries the same freighted potential to dominate a hearing, conservatives say. "It is now the flash point where politics and law meet. That flash point used to be abortion. I don't think anybody thinks that's going to be the flash point in this nomination," said William A. Jacobson, a Cornell University law professor and conservative blogger. [|Sen. Orrin G. Hatch] (Utah), another GOP member of the Judiciary Committee, said conservatives are particularly eager to avoid a Supreme Court ruling akin to the 1973 //Roe v. Wade// decision, which legalized abortion nationwide and has divided the country ever since. "I don't think members of the court, or any of us, ever want to see a decision like that again," Hatch said. Obama assured the senator in a recent meeting that he will not pick a "radical" to replace Souter, but Hatch added: "Presidents always say that. That's why we have the hearing process." Same-sex marriage gained national resonance in the wake of last month's Iowa Supreme Court ruling that legalized the practice in that state. And in the two weeks since Justice David H. Souter announced his retirement, Maine also legalized same-sex marriage, becoming the fifth state to do so; the New Hampshire legislature sent a marriage-equality bill to the governor; the New York State Assembly approved gay-marriage legislation; and the District of Columbia voted to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Those actions, in so short a time, have outstripped the ability of Democrats in Washington to stake out their public position on the issue. Obama has said that he personally opposes same-sex marriage, based on his Christian faith, but the White House said after the Iowa ruling that the president "believes that committed gay and lesbian couples should receive equal rights under the law." Most Republicans and Democrats -- Obama included -- agree that individual states should determine their own marriage laws. But Congress complicated that process by approving the Defense of Marriage Act. Rushed through by Republicans and signed by President Clinton on the eve of the 1996 election, the law allows states to ignore marriages performed in other states and denies federal recognition of legal gay marriages. Under that law, same-sex couples are barred from receiving a long list of federal benefits -- more than 1,100. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., the most recent addition to the Supreme Court, acknowledged during his January 2006 Senate hearing that "several constitutional doctrines seem to be implicated" in the legislation, including the "full faith and credit" clause that compels states to honor judgments by other state courts. Legal scholars differ on the clause's application to gay marriage, Alito noted, and "that's an issue that may well come up within the federal courts" and is "almost certain to do so." For conservative activists, the Defense of Marriage Act is the levee holding back the flood. The 2003 Supreme Court decision that threw out a Texas sodomy law sparked scores of civil challenges to state and federal gay-marriage restrictions based on discrimination and other claims. Conservative legal organizations have mobilized in opposition to these lawsuits and to increasing activity on the issue in state legislatures. One priority is to establish the right not to recognize same-sex marriage on religious grounds. In New Hampshire, Gov. John Lynch (D) is seeking protections for churches and their employees before he signs his state's pending same-sex marriage bill into law. "This is kind of like the abortion debate 30 years ago. Some states changed their laws; some didn't," said Jordan Lorence, senior counsel for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund, who counseled New Hampshire Republicans on the religious exclusion, and whose group is active in other state and federal cases. "Does the Supreme Court come in with a //Roe v. Wade// trump card?" Lorence asked. "How this is all going to play out over time, I think the new Supreme Court nominee is going to be a factor . . . which makes it a legitimate area of questioning." Conservative groups are scrutinizing potential nominees for any hint of where they stand on the Defense of Marriage Act and other issues related to same-sex marriage. Gary Marx, executive director of the Judicial Confirmation Network, one of the leading groups revving up for the summer proceedings, said of the gravity of the marriage issue, "A lot of it does depend on who the nominee is." One target is Solicitor General Elena Kagan, who is believed to be on Obama's shortlist. While dean of Harvard Law School, Kagan called the U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gay service members "both unwise and unjust" and sought to ban military recruiters from the Harvard campus. Her actions prompted numerous questions during Kagan's Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing about gay and lesbian legal rights. Noting that as solicitor general Kagan would be charged with defending the 1996 marriage law, [|Sen. John Cornyn] (R-Tex.) asked in a written question to Kagan whether she believes in a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. "There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage," Kagan responded. When Cornyn sought Kagan's opinion of the Massachusetts high court's ruling in 2003 in favor of same-sex marriage, she said she could not recall expressing one. "I suspect I participated in informal conversation about the decision when it came out, but I cannot remember anything that I said," Kagan wrote. For Republicans, there are political risks in pushing the matter too far. A Washington Post-ABC News poll in April found 49 percent of respondents in favor of allowing gay marriage and 46 percent opposed to the idea. Three years ago, a broad majority -- 58 percent to 36 percent -- said such unions should be illegal. Former congressman Bob Barr (R-Ga.), the lead author of the Defense of Marriage Act, recently renounced the law as a misguided muddle, and [|Sen. Tom Harkin] of Iowa, one of the many Democrats who voted for the legislation, reversed his stance after the Iowa Supreme Court's ruling. But while the gay rights agenda before Congress this year includes hate-crimes legislation and possibly a repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, Democrats sense that the climate is not right for repealing the federal marriage law. "Where we have prospects of success, we always want to expand to a place of more opportunity and more freedom for all Americans," said [|House Speaker Nancy Pelosi] (D-Calif.). But she added: "Right now, on our agenda, we're talking about turning the economy around." "

=//[|Hot Air:]//=
 * -quotes tend to be from "Conservative" sources
 * -facts include more "Liberal" information
 * -centered around (imminent) event/announcement
 * -uses the impending SCOTUS pick to air view from minority party
 * -some authority-disorder bias, i.e. conflicting quotes from officials regarding opinions on matter
 * -many quotes from Senators and people in high levels of government, such as Nancy Pelosi
 * -lacking in quotes from Gay Rights activists; only one quote from a conservative anti-gay marriage activist ||
 * = ===Citizen Media Coverage=== ||

"Olbermann sneers at “St. Carrie of La Jolla” for seven minutes"
"Not his ugliest performance ever — not even his ugliest with respect [|to Miss Cali] — but possibly his most gutless. I’ll let one of his sharpest lefty critics, Bob Somerby of the [|Daily Howler], explain: [Gay marriage opponent Marion] Barry is a major American politician, in a major American city. He sits where the rubber meets the road—inside a political body which may consider a bill to legalize same-sex marriages. We weren’t offended by Barry’s “ugly words” ourselves—although we hope (and assume) he was wrong in his sweeping assessment of the views within DC’s black community." //[|Read rest of article...]// =media type="custom" key="3817801"=

<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> || ==<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%; color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">- <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Citizen Media vs. Mainstream Media in Terms of News Delivery on Gay Marriage ==
 * -very ideologically biased
 * -offers explanations for both sides //sometimes (//i.e. for "Free Speech" instance but not the stupidity allegations)
 * -combating an equally ideologically biased video (see above)
 * -includes links to other sources
 * -uses passionate, fiery language
 * = =Comparative Analysis:= ||
 * < =<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">-- =

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;"> ==<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Introduction == <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">In the past few weeks, two more states have legalized gay marriage, with similar legislation progressing in state legislatures across the nation. This issue has sparked fervent debate across the political and ideological spectrum. In fact, public opinion is very evenly divided on this issue. A recent Washington Post/ABC poll indicated, “49% of the people polled said it should be legal for gay people to marry, and 46% said it should be illegal.” This poll reveals a nation divided. Subsequently, the news media has been actively following the progression of legislation in addition to substantial reporting on fringe issues, such as the Miss California incident. Through this Wiki page, two examples are used to contrast mainstream news to citizen media, and the effects these differences have on the way the news is delivered and processed by its audience in the context of this issue.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Example One
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">The first example contrasts two videos from conservative cable news network Fox News to an article on the liberal leaning blog the Huffington Post. The two Fox News videos show two primary unifying themes regarding their news delivery. The first is their ideological bias, which is exhibited in multiple forms in both videos. The second is that both these shows highlight opinions and are not event based.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">//Mainstream Media//
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">The first Fox video is a clip from the Glenn Beck show, a conservative commentator whose show airs on Fox News on weeknights at 5pm. In this video, Glenn Beck attempts to claim that people will demand the freedom to practice polygamy if same sex marriage is instituted. In the video, Beck claims that you “can’t make an intellectually honest argument against [this].” However, there are certainly refutations that can be made against his wild claims, he just chooses not to discuss them. In this case, it seems that Beck is motivated by his own personal and political perspective against gay marriage to portray this supposed connection between polygamy and same-sex marriage. This is clear ideological bias. Also, this aspect of the video is part of the inherent nature of an opinion based news commentary show: the host can paint an image in whatever way he wants as long as he doesn’t explicitly lie about the facts. This means that, although Beck could not claim falsified statistics or other made up data, he could choose not to discuss certain aspects of the situation, thereby presenting only one side—his side. On commentary-style shows such as this, a guest often will provide his or her own opinion in addition to the host’s. In this case, the guest is a woman who—by nature of the production setup—has a distinct disadvantage when discussing the issue at hand. Beck uses props, but the guest, Jenny Block, cannot see the video feed of Beck or his props—therefore she cannot fully rebut his presentation. Finally, Beck uses these props and other visual tools to try to get an emotional response from the viewer against gay marriage. All the little dolls, except the traditional married pair, are literally thrown around on the desk, which gives the viewer a sense of irreverence for love and sanctity with same sex marriages. The second Fox News video is a clip from Fox News Watch, a weekly show airing on the network each Saturday. The video discusses the “gay mafia” of the New York Times. The host, Jon Scott, suggests that gay issues are featured in the times, as he says “above the fold,” solely because of the gay people working in the company. Additionally, the usage of the terms “agenda-driven media” and, again, “gay mafia” give a negative connotation to the viewer. The term ‘mafia’ alludes to the underground crime organization that flourished during the early to mid 20th century, and by juxtaposing ‘gay’ with ‘mafia,’ Scott is making the audience connect gay people to crime and other undesirable things, giving it a very negative undertone. This shows blatant ideological bias, because there are no facts to suggest that the gay employees of the New York Times are in any way engaging in illegal or unethical conduct in their positions. In fact, this entire “news” report stemmed from entertainment magazine Out’s “Power 50” list, featuring important and influential gay people. Fox News diverted public attention to a single paragraph entry on a feature in a quasi-tabloid magazine, instead of focusing on the real gay issues at hand: gay marriage, gays in the military, gay adoption, et. al. This demonstrates media’s fixation on providing sensationalist and entertaining stories to make money from gaining more viewers. In the end, the current state of mainstream media is dominated by creating value for the stockholder. Unless companies are able to generate more and more return on their investment, stockholders lose interest and the companies’ financial woes increase.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">//Citizen Media//
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">These two videos stand in stark contrast to the citizen media article from the Huffington Post. This news article was actually written by the Associated Press (AP) wire and put on the Huffington Post website. Subsequently, the article demonstrates minimal ideological bias. The story centers on a quote that Michael Steele made when speaking recently at the Georgia State Republican Convention. The article provides a framework for the quote and includes recent advances in the gay rights movement as well as recent controversy surrounding Steele. However, the surrounding material, that is the web-frame of the page, includes links to three blog articles on this topic, all of which are ideologically biased in a liberal fashion. All in all, this article is mostly cut and dry reporting, with the only discrepancy being as the frame of the website page. This is only natural, considering that the Huffington Post, which is a liberal blog, would have links to liberal blog entries on its article provided by the Associated Press. Also, the presentation by the Huffington Post demonstrates a no-frills, cheap, and efficient way to get news to readers without worrying about higher costs and returns for stockholders. Huffington Post is not a publicly traded company, and is not owned by one, so the owners can be satisfied with a lower return on investment.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Example Two
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">The second example demonstrates two more observations on media: the corruptions caused by other biases in mainstream media, specifically authority disorder bias and glory bias, and the usage of passionate and personal language to achieve an emotional connection with the reader in citizen media.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">//Mainstream Media//
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">The second example begins with a Washington Post article about the recent Supreme Court vacancy, and the significance of the gay marriage issue in the confirmation process of the nominee. The story includes quotes almost entirely from famous politicians. This represents another facet of news journalism: the most powerful person gets to be quoted. This is a result of the so-called “glory bias.” Journalists, especially in Washington, want to be considered “insiders” and so they try to score the highest connections and best interviews. Subsequently, when famous people are around to be queried on an issue, their quotes are published. Thus, the story includes quotes from many important conservative Congressmen and women, and includes only one quote from an activist: a traditional marriage advocate, because grassroots organizations do not have the same reputation as politicians. There are also hints of authority-disorder bias in this article. The author sets up a two-sided article, with the traditional marriage supporters in government getting most of the quotes, but with most of the facts leaning in the other direction, and conflict arising between them. This natural bias is organizational, as it gives the author a method of framing the story, even if it doesn’t portray the situation in its truest light. Finally, it’s important to note that the article is centered on an impending Presidential act, his pick for Supreme Court, unlike the other media examples, such as the Fox News videos, which were not inspired by specific events.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">//Citizen Media//
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">The second part of example two is a blog entry from Hot Air, a conservative citizen media site. The Hot Air blog entry dissects a Keith Olbermann video on the Miss California controversy. Olbermann himself is very opinionated and ideologically biased in his video on the topic, and the blogger responds in kind. The blog uses strong language to make its point, and includes links to previous stories and other relevant information. Unlike the traditional news article from the Washington Post, this entry is written in the first person, which gives the effect of the blogger seeming to himself get into the fight. Also, it’s worth noting that the blogger is sometimes able to admit his side isn’t always right. For example, he admits that Olbermann is right on the freedom of speech point, but fails to recognize other accurate allegations that Olbermann considered in his video. Finally, the blog entry uses hostile—even inappropriate—language that is largely absent from the other examples, including calling Keith Olbermann “gutless.” This is an important observation, because it reveals the uncensored aspect of blogs. Blogs are not restricted like television or radio by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and can portray a story in a more personal light. Blogs use more passionate language, and don’t seem as filtered and framed as traditional news stories. This is the one major difference between blogs and traditional news sources, including both newspapers and television.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Conclusion
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">The unifying conclusion that can be drawn from the contrast between the mainstream news media and the citizen media in these two examples is that there is a wider range of resources available to a media consumer on the Internet and on television than in printed media. In //News: Politics of Illusion//, Lance Bennett reveals that people are most accepting of news and commentary that falls in line with their own viewpoint. Therefore, Republicans tend to think that the media is biased to the left, and Democrats think it’s biased to the right. Thus, online and on TV, people are most comfortable watching shows that agree with their own stance. So, television producers and bloggers write ideologically biased news to cater to individual niche markets, which makes money because of the reliable base audience. Thus it’s the format of the news presented that is important. Printed media, unlike Internet and television, cannot offer a narrow perspective because of formatting—it must appeal to as many people as possible and thus be as unbiased as possible. In the Huffington Post example, an Associated Press article was featured, surrounded by links to liberal blog entries on the subject. Even though the information being presented in the article is ideologically unbiased, the reader still has available a plethora of links to more biased blog entries on the same subject. In effect, on the Internet the reader is given options about what published opinions he or she wants to read on a certain topic. On television, programming abounds with entertaining opinion shows of all different beliefs. Fox News airs overwhelmingly conservative opinion shows without much news or events backing them whatsoever, and MSNBC does the same but with a liberal trend. The nature of TV lends itself to these stations presenting ideologically biased shows because there is, again, the option of hearing from counter-perspectives on a different channel. However, in print media a news story is a news story: it attempts to be as ideologically unbiased as possible because it needs to be. Unlike with the Internet and television, in most cities there is only one major newspaper, and thus only one real source of printed “news” that a consumer could buy. Thus, the newspaper would want to attract as wide a range of consumers as possible, and so it must provide as unbiased news as possible, so as to not alienate either side. Therefore, the real distinction in media lies in the manner in which the news is received more than the substance of the news. The television and Internet are self selecting media, with people choosing to watch or read opinion shows based on their own views, while printed media, such as newspapers, cannot offer those same options and so must remain as unbiased as possible.

Although this cannot be seen as a fully comprehensive study of mainstream versus citizen media, it does reveal several important observations. First, the proliferation of ideological bias on television and on the Internet is considerable. Second, people read and believe what they want. And third, blogs are able to provide a more uncensored, unfiltered, and passionate approach to news. All in all, there are important distinctions between citizen and mainstream media, but in the end the consumer will consume whatever information he or she wants. The recent influx in gateways to reaching news has given people more opportunities to learn more about the world and to be more involved in the news process.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Author’s Note
<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">It is important to note that it is extraordinarily difficult to compare “mainstream media” vs. “citizen media” because, as is pointed out above, there is a diverse range of stories and formats within both categories. The examples chosen are all slightly different. In terms of ‘”mainstream,” two videos are in the same category as a printed article. In the “citizen media” category, a blog entry was partnered with an article from a newsblog site. Therefore, the conclusions drawn should be taken with a grain to salt.

<span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;"> Sources

 * 1) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Agiesta, Jennifer, and Alec MacGillis. "Poll: Rising U.S. Support for Social Issues, Such as Gay Marriage." The Washington Post 30 Apr. 2009. 22 May 2009 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/30/AR2009043001640.html>.
 * 2) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Glenn Beck Show Fox News video
 * 3) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Fox News Report video
 * 4) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Same as iii
 * 5) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Same as iii
 * 6) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Same as iii
 * 7) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Bennett, W. Lance. News: The Politics of Illusion (7th Edition) (Longman Classics in Political Science). New York: Longman, 2006.
 * 8) <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype','Book Antiqua',Palatino,serif; font-size: 103%;">Pew Research Center: http://people-press.org/report/215/news-audiences-increasingly-politicized ||