Same-sex marriage is a controversial
topic that has grabbed everyone’s interest over the past few years. The Supreme Court has recently heard
arguments over the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which states that legally
married same-sex couples cannot enjoy the same financial and other benefits
that their heterosexual couple counterparts can, in the case United States
v. Windsor. This case has been
equated to Brown v. Board of Education, as a modern day trial on social
inequalities. Many have demanded for a
positive change for homosexuals, but others are still set in their ways and
believe that allowing gays the same rights that heterosexuals are entitled to
would be blasphemy. Numerous texts have
been written on this subject, particularly recently as it has become the center
social issue. I have chosen to review
an article from CNN.com on the subject in the light of the Plain Style to
examine how it acts within its activity system.
Same-sex marriage has been written
about in an immeasurable amount of contexts.
Government documents written in the official style, the bible written in
the creative style, among many others, all try to extract some type of truth as
to how to answer this present what type of morality and legal approaches should
be ensued. The article “Same-Sex
marriage and DOMA: 5 things we learned from oral arguments” by Bill Mears the
CNN Supreme Court Producer, tries to offer some explanation to all of the
arguments in a way that is very reader-friendly. It appeared on the website on March 28, 2013. Similarly to the topic of abortion,
virtually every person has a hard-set opinion on gay rights. Today it is largely accepted that a person
is born gay, it is not a choice that they make. With that being the case, gay rights affect the young and the
old, the politically active and the more reserved, the gay and the
straight. With this amount of people
interested in the topic, the activity system for the article is quite
large.
It
is a commonly accepted fact that no news source is without its biases. It is near impossible to write on current
events without expressing some individual opinion, whether intentionally or
not. FOX News is considered overwhelmingly
conservative, a machine for right-wing propaganda. Many democratic politicians have boycotted FOX sponsored
events. In 2007, Barack Obama, Hilary
Clinton, and John Edwards dropped out of FOX News-hosted presidential debates
resulting in them having to be cancelled. MSNBC is on the other end of the
spectrum, and is considered to have a liberal bias. Republicans own the majority of news outlets so some people
consider the idea of liberal-biased news to be bit of joke because of mass is
deferential to Republicans. Even so,
MSNBC presents itself on a left-leaning stance and promotes Democratic
values. It was obvious in the 2012
presidential campaign that Obama was shown in a positive light while Romney was
shown negatively. One red-hot dispute
occurred in 2009 when photo shopped pictures were used of Sarah Palin in
promotion of her book. MSNBC later
apologized but it goes to show how filthy news outlets can fight in promotion
of their ideals. CNN is considered to
be one of, if not the most, unbiased sources for news although it is leaning
more towards the left. It of course has
a political agenda like any other news source however it makes a full effort to
be moderate. It is a front-runner in
international news as well as national and is considered to be credible. I will be demonstrating how “Same-Sex
marriage and DOMA: 5 things we learned from oral arguments” is presented in an
unbiased nature.
The
article does not reveal any sense of trying to persuade the reader’s opinion in
one way or another on if same-sex marriage is “good.” Its goal is not to boast one side of the argument over the other
but to rather inform the reader of the current situation within the
courtroom. The term “same-sex” marriage
is used instead of “gays” or “homosexuals.”
The word “gay” has seen a whirlwind of changes in connotation. The LGBT community has tried to reclaim the
word in recent years from being used as a playground word for something that is
unpleasant and vile to a term that is more of a demonstration of pride for
one’s sexual orientation. This new,
proud, connotation is relatively liberal.
“Homosexual” however is used in a more conservative sense. By using “same-sex” instead of the other two
options, the article is able to convey a sense of being unbiased. This is done in the hopes of appealing to a
larger activity system.
The average American does not have
time to keep up on every government or social issue as thoroughly as they would
like to so they look to social media and online databases for a quick synopsis
of current issues instead. A mother may
look at this article in between dropping off and picking up their child from
soccer practice. Or perhaps a high
school student whom is fighting the idea within himself if he could possibly be
gay. Whatever the case, any person in
America with access to a computer could be compelled to read this article. The group who would be reading this is a bit
smaller then America though. CNN
readers are people who want the least biased report possible, as I discussed it
in relation with other news sources.
People who access news from the web tend to be in their mid twenties to
forties. The comments on the news
article reflected this idea and also showed the range of opinions on the
subject. They follow norms of civil
manor; I did not detect any arbitrary personal attacks by one commenter on
another. This reflects the idea that
the readers have some sort of education as it takes educated and mature people
to have a civilized discussion about such a heated topic without resulting to
harsh language and arbitrary insults. I
have listed two very opinionated comments that demonstrate the type of person
to read this article:
The video placed at
the head of the article also gives insight into the specific type of person who
would continue on to read it. It is
taken from the CNN show “The Situation Room.”
“The Situation Room” is a modern way of presenting the news. As FOX News and talk radio broke the mold
CNN developed new, more upbeat ways to inform viewers. The show gives a very laid back vibe with
the host and his guests standing around a table discussing the events. Furthermore, the ticker on the bottom of the
screen lists a news story about Justin Bieber.
These attributes indicate a targeted younger audience. The elderly crowd presumably prefers the news
that they are used to that is styled in much more of a professional
manner. The mediating artifact supports
my hypothesis that primarily 25 to 40 year olds hoping to gain a glimpse into
modern news coverage view this article.
This is still considered to be a huge audience. With such a large activity system appealing
to such a diverse crowd, the article must act in an oversimplified, accessible
way. The easiest approach in doing so:
the Plain Style.
The Plain Style is characterized as
being the most clear and straightforward style to write in. It can be found everywhere: job manuals,
medical information, bus schedules.
Journalism and news reporting generally embody most of the
characteristics. The article “Same-sex
marriage and DOMA: 5 things we learned from oral arguments” proves that it will
follow the Plain Style guidelines right off the bat in its visually appealing
style. The paragraphs are quite short,
only two or three sentences, and the points of the article are represented in a
list form. The “5 things we learned”
are indeed listed one through five.
According to a readability calculator, the average words per sentence
are 15.6. The Plain Style promotes
short, less complex sentences. While
these sentences aren’t overtly short, the ideas within are still simple, and
made even more understandable through smart use of commas.
The article proves itself to be
credible through the use of quotes. By
quoting the speaker of the House and justices of republican and democrat points
of view, the author establishes his credibility by not promoting his
preconceived notions of which party is right and demonstrating proof on the
subject. The author does quote Chief
Justice John Roberts on his argument that President Obama has overstepped his
bounds by declaring DOMA unconstitutional and refusing to have the Department
of Justice defend it. Instead, the
House Counsel is. The Chief Justice is
indeed accurate in his point that it is not up to the Executive branch to
decide what laws the Congress has put into place are constitutional or not,
that is the Judicial branch’s duty.
This is a very moderate point to make for a news agency that is
supposedly extensively pro-Obama but then again the author understands that if
readers wanted a biased, left or right leaning analysis of what is going on
they would read an article from FOX or MSNBC.
The author fully understands his position at CNN as a representative of
the moderate and works to account the recent events in an unbiased, yet
informative way.
An active voice is used in order to
articulate clearly what the facts of the article are. Some solid examples I found were, “Wednesday’s memorable remarks
came from Justice Elena Kagan,” “Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia have been
known to dominate especially high-profile debates,” and “He pointed out.” By identifying the doer of the action, the
sentence becomes clearer and more emphatic.
The entire article is written in this way, there is no questioning what
exactly is being said or the making of verbs into nouns supported by the to-be
verb as there would be in the Official Style.
The Official Style also boasts speaking in the third-person whereas the
Plain Style supports the more understandable and identifiable first and second
persons. In the introduction of this
piece the author writes, “Here are five things we learned from arguments in
this case.” By using we (the
first-person) the readers find themselves more easily associating with what is
written and thus feel a bigger impact.
Having
the reader understand what is written is the most important key, even if that
means oversimplifying the text. An
example of oversimplification comes at the beginning of the article.
A simile is a tool
that is common to the Creative Style but in its use here it is an effective way
of illustrating to the reader exactly what is being said. However, the use of this metaphor is almost
insulting to the reader because of how sophomoric it sounds. The motive behind the activity system is to
be educated on this important social issue, not to be patronized with allusions
of a picky child. The Supreme Court’s
decision on this case is likely to hold for a substantial number of years. Once the Court makes a decision on a
controversial and widely publicized issue they do not typically revisit it
until the dust has settled many years later.
A whole community of peoples lives could be extensively changed, the
legal binding of the culminating point in two peoples love could become a
possibility for all or the idea could be stripped away. DOMA and Prop 8 are very real issues that
are being discussed and to equate them to a picky eater is to take away some of
the magnitude of the situation. This
opening statement may justifiably insult the activity system that includes gays
and their allies.
The reader must also question what
was left out of the article in the thoughts of sparing them from being
overwhelmed by a technical standpoint.
It is clear that no jargon of the law area is used. This was smart on part of the author because
the activity system includes so many divisions of labor and to assume that
extensive terminology is common by all would be presumptuous to say the
least. The largest, most technical word
used in the whole article is “adjudicated,” and even most adults can figure the
meaning in the context. The end of the
article gives the reader an idea of what is to come next in the process of the
court, all of which can be explained in very technical ways with specific
jargon, however it spells out step by step what will happen using very simple
language.
This article gives you a clear sense
of what is happening in the law world of same-sex marriage and gay rights. If someone tried to deduce the current state
of affairs from lawyers’ notes or had waited until the Court’s official
opinion, they would be mystified as to what was going on. CNN offers their audience a leisurely way to
keep up with current affairs through their well-executed use of the Plain Style
in an unbiased way.
By: Erin Perry
No comments:
Post a Comment