My Opinion Counts - I have proof
I was upset about a slanted and biased article by writer Tim Dickenson. Specifically, Mr. Dickenson clearly attmempted to pass his opinions off as representing what "the majority of Americans" are thinking. Agree or disagree with Mr. Dickenson, that type of journalism is irresponsible.
Unfortunately, my letter was edited down pretty heavily in order to fit in the limited space for such things. So, for that reason, I have decided to post the full letter that I sent to Rolling Stone. You can judge for yourself whether the editing by the magazine was fair or not.
Here it is:
I am disappointed at Rolling Stone’s growing willingness to pass-off agenda-based opinion pieces as journalism. A case in point is Tim Dickinson’s recent National Affairs piece, “The Politics of Fear.” (RS #1003, June 29, 2006)
Let me first say that I support same-sex marriage and oppose a Constitutional amendment banning it. It is clear that Mr. Dickenson and I are in agreement there.
My concern lies in the factually inaccurate and misleading statements made by Mr. Dickinson in support of his agenda. For example, When Mr. Dickinson asks, “Why would the president throw himself behind a measure that he knew was opposed by most voters [?],” he should be able to back up the question with data. As supporting data, Mr. Dickinson vaguely cites only one, unnamed poll that purports to show a drop from 60% to 42% in the popular support for an amendment to the United States Constitution.
Who was polled? Who conducted the poll? What were the questions? Does this reported result show a drop in support for state amendments or just federal? Mr. Dickinson fails to address any of these issues.
The fact is that, to date, nineteen states have held a popular vote whether or not to amend their state constitution to ban gay marriage. The citizens of all nineteen of those states voted overwhelmingly in favor of the ban. This includes a vote as recently as June of this year in Alabama. (1998 – Alaska, Hawaii; 2002- Nevada; 2004 - Montana, Oregon, Utah, Missouri, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi; 2005- Kansas, Texas; 2006 - Alabama) Five more states will vote on the same issue this coming November (Wisconsin, South Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia)
Even the people of California, whose liberal leanings are so profound that most Republican presidential candidates barely campaign there, voted in 2000 to pass Proposition 22, which would deny recognition of a same-sex marriage deemed legal in any other state. Despite the vote of the “regular people,” the California legislature passed a bill to legalize gay marriage. Does this show a disconnect between politicians and the American people wherein the politicians are more liberal than the public? Again, Mr. Dickinson fails to address this very important piece of history.
My point is a simple one. Rolling Stone and their writers are free to speak their mind and support any agenda they wish. However, to state that “most voters” are behind a particular agenda without the support of either history or current, reliable data, is irresponsible journalism.
If Mr. Dickinson does have reliable supporting data, I would love to see it. Without such data, this article gives conservatives a shining example of the “emotion over fact” tactic that they repeatedly assign to liberals. I cannot debate this issue effectively based on Mr. Dickinson’s “gut feeling” on America’s opinion of same-sex marriage. It is a cop-out to say that the article gives me a springboard to research the issue myself, because my research negates Mr. Dickinson’s position.
Why is this important to me? For many years, I have looked to Rolling Stone to be loud voice for America’s more forward-thinking population. The writers of Rolling Stone have built a reputation as an important, balancing voice in the world of modern, conservative politics. Mr. Dickinson’s choice to use an “impression of the world” rather than research to support his position undermines the magazine’s credibility on major issues and waters down the effectiveness of the writing.
Bob Karwin, Sun City, CA

