Same story, different bias

[Satya]

I'm just posting this because I find it funny. I usually read the same stories from several different sources and to get an idea of how that source may be biased. So here is a story of a recently released poll. See how they emphasize the facts differently.

Original AP article...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jFdXKsKamMQEzqFAvCWykmHCvpwQD9B7NVV02

Two different sources...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...rt-civil-unions-but-oppose-same-sex-marriage/

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=31432



If you want to post your own examples, then feel free.

 

[acd]

This may be a dumb question.. but oh well.
I need studying help.
I'm studying cognitive dissonance now. Would you say that the majority of Americans favoring civil unions while opposing gay marriage is an example of cognitive dissonance? It all just seems like an argument of semantics, with people favoring civil unions for gays, still refusing to acknowledge the equality of their relationship status with straight people? Or do I misunderstand?

According to what I understand, cognitive dissonance is refusing to acknowledge certain information or criteria or whatever so as not to truly change one's stance.

 

[Quinlan]

One of the failings of modern science is that for it to reach the masses it has to inevitably pass through a big sensationalising filter/amplifier of media bias.

 

[Satya]

This may be a dumb question.. but oh well.
I need studying help.
I'm studying cognitive dissonance now. Would you say that the majority of Americans favoring civil unions while opposing gay marriage is an example of cognitive dissonance? It all just seems like an argument of semantics, with people favoring civil unions for gays, still refusing to acknowledge the equality of their relationship status with straight people? Or do I misunderstand?

According to what I understand, cognitive dissonance is refusing to acknowledge certain information or criteria or whatever so as not to truly change one's stance.

The gay marriage/civil union argument is a superb example of cognitive dissonance. The group that wants to withhold gay marriage does so because they find homosexual behavior to be immoral and a perversion. However, since society frowns upon prejudice, a good share of the group has to find a way to settle the conflict between the societal expectations and their own personal values, for fear of being labeled a bigot. Most realize that civil unions are just about as much a long shot as gay marriage, and so they can tell themselves that they support civil unions as sort of a compromise. However, whenever states attempt to grant gays and lesbians the right to civil unions, they are met with resistance from the same people who initially said they supported them but who did not support gay marriage. Why? Because the question is no longer about "gay marriage' and so their own personal values are allowed to emerge.

 

[acd]

I was looking up some stuff about gay marriage and Obama and I found this quote from this site

In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

Though he supports civil unions with all the same legal rights and privileges as marriage.

Thanks for responding to my question, Satya.