Like the combined chart for abortion, this chart combines the previous charts, allowing for a comparison of media and prominence in Senate confirmation hearings. The general shape of the two graphs mostly correlate, apart from the abnormally large spike for Thomas’s confirmation hearing. For both front page appearances and confirmation hearings, there are notable spikes in 1991, corresponding to Thomas’s confirmation hearing, as well as an overall increase in both graphs in the early 1980s, most likely as an effect of the Bakke case, which took place in 1978. The increase in 1995 corresponds to the hearing of Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, yet because there were no Senate confirmation hearings for ten years, there is no corresponding increase …show more content…
These limitations warrant a broader investigation into other politicized issues. The Supreme Court highly politicized the two issues we focus on, with abortion arguably being the most politicized topic in our country, so our research cannot extend to all Supreme Court issues, especially those which are not as politically polarizing. However, it is reasonable to expect that other high profile issues, such as the death penalty or same-sex marriage, have similar results to what we discovered for abortion and affirmative action. A further investigation into which issues prompt the most media coverage and hearing comments compared to abortion and affirmative action may show the particular importance of these two issues, especially abortion, in politics, the judiciary, and …show more content…
While not every key case indicates an increase in the front page stories, or in the number of questions asked in a confirmation hearing, the graphs still show that Roe and Bakke are where the politicization began. The graphs also seem to indicate that abortion is a more politicized topic than affirmative action, given the amount of front page stories and the number of questions asked in confirmation hearings. For confirmation hearings, it also appears that an individual candidate’s ideology or demographics influences the number of question asked. There are many factors that contribute to politicization, front page stories, and questions asked during confirmation hearings, so it is difficult to say that our research proved the exact moment of politicization. However, our research mostly indicates that the politicization did begin when the Supreme Court heard and decided each issue’s landmark
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
Otto von Bismarck once said, “Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.” The arduous process that a bill undergoes in order to become a law may seem grueling and pointless; however, the processes high caliber of difficulty allows for the extreme prestige and exclusivity of bills that are passed. Because the process is so exhausting, and filibusters, subsequently requiring a super-majority vote to pass a bill, have always been such a threat in Congress, historically, bills that attempt to reform sensitive issues have not fared well in the legislative branch. However, when Congress does pass controversial laws, it then also faces the task of effectively enforcing them. But, when the process is carried out to completion, laws that are enforced have significant impacts on the everyday lives of the American people—such as laws concerning abortion rights. In the United States, the government and Congress have significantly affected the rights of women with regard to abortions through laws that either restrict or guarantee their legality and availability, while the government’s capacity to do so is affected by the principle of federalism along with that of the separation of powers.
Palmer, Elizabeth A. "The Court and Public Opinion." CQ Weekly 2 Dec. 2000. CQ Weekly. SAGE Publications. Web. 1 Mar. 2000. .
Bias More perceive liberal bias than conservative bias” George Gallup.Web. September 2011 [cited January 2012]
South University Online. (2013). POL2076: American Government: Week 4: People and Politics—Interest Groups. Retrieved from http://myeclassonline.com
John Ashcroft was narrowly confirmed as the nation’s next attorney general after serious controversy surrounding his nomination. He has faced wide-ranging attacks on his views on abortion. “If I had the opportunity to pass but a single law,” Ashcroft told a conservative newsletter in 1998, “I would fully recognize the constitutional right of life of every unborn child and ban every abortion except for those medically necessary to save the life of the mother.” (Issues2000). As Attorney General for Missouri, he defended all the way to the Supreme Court in 1979 a Missouri law that restricted where, how and when abortions could be performed. He opposes all abortion. As senator, he tried to get the Constitution amended to outlaw abortion even in the case of rape or incest (issues2000). The key question surrounding Ashcroft is how strong his religious beliefs and political ties o...
Same sex marriage has been a controversial issue since homosexual couples started to petition for their civil and marital rights. Even though homosexuality existed long before our society labeled it, it is still not socially accepted by many groups as well as individuals. As a result, people tend to be biased when reporting facts concerning homosexual marriage. Biases can be hidden in many literature works like books, journals, magazines, and articles. Through these documents writers try to provoke an emotional response from their readers in order to influence their view of a usually highly debated matter. An example of this would be three articles through which the rhetors dissimilarly influence the opinion of their audience by omitting or emphasizing certain facts about the legalization of gay marriage in New York State.
...ion, it will shape the framework in which we discuss the issue of gay adoption. This is true. We must recognize the fearful power of one to appoint these decision makers without a sufficiently balanced congress- it is the ability to embody political rhetoric within a judicial structure. Rhetoric itself may and does sway public opinion, but its embodiment is the ability to set precedents which may be applied in broad-sweeping generalities, rather than the specifics of a single law.
Therefore, I try to figure out a connection between those political controversy and human’s behavior. I don’t actually think different opinions are scary at all because speech is the right bestowed by the first amendment and what determines who we are. But by showing how misleading words can be through Planned Parenthood issue, I want to use this research to emphasize how important it is for an audience to think critically when faced with controversy and dissenting voices.
Television has affected every aspect of life in society, radically changing the way individuals live and interact with the world. However, change is not always for the better, especially the influence of television on political campaigns towards presidency. Since the 1960s, presidential elections in the United States were greatly impacted by television, yet the impact has not been positive. Television allowed the public to have more access to information and gained reassurance to which candidate they chose to vote for. However, the media failed to recognize the importance of elections. Candidates became image based rather than issue based using a “celebrity system” to concern the public with subjects regarding debates (Hart and Trice). Due to “hyperfamiliarity” television turned numerous people away from being interested in debates between candidates (Hart and Trice). Although television had the ability to reach a greater number of people than it did before the Nixon/Kennedy debate, it shortened the attention span of the public, which made the overall process of elections unfair, due to the emphasis on image rather than issue.
The advocacy explosion is strongly linked to the decline of the American political party and the role of the political parties in elections. As interest groups have gained more power and had a larger control over politics and political goods the power that is exerted by political parties has dwindled. The power of the interest group has grown larger with the amount of members and the financial rewards that have come with the new members. In elections interest groups do not usually participate directly with the candidate or the election. Berry points out that “Groups often try to leverage their endorsement to obtain support for one of their priorities” (Berry, 53). With interest groups spreading their resources around the actual election can be affected very minimally by the many interest groups that contribute money to the election. However, the candidates who obtain political office through the help of special interest money still owe some sort of loyalty to the interest group regardless of which party wins the election. This loyalty and the promise of more money in the future gives the elected of...
Williams, Daniel K. "No Happy Medium: The Role of Americans' Ambivalent View of Fetal Rights in Political Conflict over Abortion Legalization." Academic Search Premier. EBSCO, 1 Jan. 2013. Web. 25 Feb. 2014.
The Court’s decision affected the laws of 46 states. From 1975 through today, Americans have almost continually believed that abortion should be legal "only under certain circumstances." In the decade following the Roe v. Wade decision, the number of Americans holding extreme positions (one extreme position held that abortion should be legal in all cases and the other believed it should be completely banned) was around the 20% level for both ends of the spectrum. In the 1980s, the general attitude shifted toward the pro-choice position, and by 1990, the liberal extreme exceeded the conservative extreme two-to-one. However, in 1996, the number of people holding the extreme pro-choice position dropped and more people took the middle position (that abortion should be legal under certain circumstances). Currently, Gallup finds that 26% of Americans say abortion should be legal in all cases, 56% say it should be legal in certain cases, and 17% say it should be illegal in all cases.
Since Roe v. Wade, the issue of abortion has sparked a symbolic war based on the religious, personal, and moral beliefs of two opposing groups: anti-abortionists, who see abortion as murder; and pro-abortionists, who view it “as a symbol of women’s rights to control their own lives.” (Calhoun 220) Public opinion on the issue is no less divided: according to a 2003 poll, 49% of respondents described themselves as “more pro-abortion” while 45% were “more anti-abortion.” (Shaw) However, when the question concerns the legality of abortion, the percentages become skewed. In a 2000 survey, 53% believed that abortion should be legal while 35% believed the contrary. (Shaw) When these questions, in turn, become more specific, important differences occur. A poll by The American National Election Studies offered the following results: 42% of the sample felt “a woman should be able to obtain an abortion as a matter of personal choice”; 15% felt it should be legal “only after establishing need”; 29% believe it should be permitted “only in case of rape, incest, or when the woman’s life is in danger”; and a mere 12% felt is should “never be permitted.” (Shaw) An overwhe...
In our democratic society, mass media is the driving force of public opinion. Media sources such as Internet, newspaper, news-broadcasts, etc, play significant roles in shaping a person’s understanding and perception about the events occurred in our daily lives. As long as the newspapers, internet, network television, etc, continued to be easily accessible to the public, the media will continue to have an influence in shaping its opinions. Factors such as agenda-setting, framing and priming help shape the public opinions. Agenda-setting is when the media focuses their attention on selected issues on which the public will form opinion on, whereas framing allows the media to select certain aspects about the problem and then make them appear more salient. Similarly, priming works by repeatedly exposing certain issues to public. As the issues get more exposure, the individual will be more likely to recall or retain the information in their minds. This paper will discuss these three factors played out systemically by media and how our opinions are constantly being influence and shape by them.