18
what extent are these dangers actually present in the same-sex marriage debates? I turn to
that question now.
III. STUDYING THE SAME-SEX MARRIAGE DEBATES
CULTURAL, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CONSTRAINTS
Substantial cultural, social and political constraints shape the nature of public debates
over same-sex marriage. People might debate interpersonally or through the mass media,
though generally, most citizens prefer private interpersonal discussions with family and friends
to more public discussions (Conover et al. 2002; Karst 2000). Public discussion that is
mediated by the mass media has several political advantages over interpersonal political
discussions. It reaches a much larger and more heterogeneous audience than do
interpersonal discussions, and thus can have a potentially greater impact on public discourse
and opinion. Furthermore, people are more selective in their interpersonal communication
than they are in their consumption of mass media (Mutz and Martin 1997), thus making it more
likely that they will allow themselves to be exposed to “difference” through the mass media
than through interpersonal communication. Consequently, the potential effect of discussion is
magnified when it is published in a newspaper or carried on television. In addition, such
political discourse is genuinely public, which makes it accessible to other citizens—not to
mention social scientists who wish to study it.
For these reasons, I chose to focus on “letters to the editor” as a form of public
discussion engaged in by average citizens, as opposed to political elites, which contributes to
public discourse on the same-sex marriage issue. There is, however, a downside to studying
such mediated political discussions. Much of the dialogic nature of discussion is lost,
particularly in newspapers. So, for example, “letters to the editor” can create a serial
discussion, as readers engage in back and forth responses to one another’s letters. But such
an exchange lacks the spontaneity that an interpersonal discussion might have.
Moreover, mediated political discussions, like newspaper exchanges, place constraints
on the nature of potential discussion. A number of factors potentially limit whether papers
choose to publish letters about same-sex marriage, and the impact of these constraints can
create considerable variability in their publication. First, the flow of events—the rhythm of
public life—influences the selection process. Letters about same-sex marriage are more likely
to be written and published when there is an event to tie them to (Oliver and Myers 1999).
Second, the editorial policies of the paper and the biases of the editors might influence the
selection of letters. Large national newspapers like the New York Times and The Wall Street
Journal receive more letters than they can publish. Thus they are more likely to screen out
letters filled with “identity talk” and emotional expressions in favor of letters that clearly and
civilly present a position. In contrast, small local papers typically have less rigorous screening
Convention