Social Media and Marriage Equality in Australia: The Media Roles in the Public Sphere and the Agenda-Setting
Abstract
Marriage equality or the equal status of same-sex marriage has undergone a rather tough road in Australia, involving diverging opinions in parties at the state and federal levels and constitutional amendments. It appears that people in power set the agenda on the legalization of same-sex marriage. However, it cannot be denied that social media played an almost decisive role in this process because it enabled the gathering of massive public opinion to pressure the government to make changes. To be specific, social media or social networking sites offered platforms for people concerned to share reports about the progress of foreign countries in legalizing same-sex marriage, to express their opinions and to launch campaigns in support of their beliefs. This essay explores the role that social media played in the legalization of marriage equality movement in Australia from the perspectives of the public sphere theory and the agenda-setting theory.
References
McCombs M. A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies 2005; 6(4): 543–557.
Kingdon JW. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston, MA: Little, Brown 1984.
Wolfe M, Jones BD, Baumgartner FR. A failure to communicate: Agenda setting in media and policy studies. Political Communication 2013; 30(2): 175–192.
Baumgartner FR, Jones BD. Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1993.
Dunaway J, Branton R, Abrajano M. Agenda setting, public opinion, and the issue of immigration reform. Social Science Quarterly 2010; 91(2): 359–378.
Dragu T, Fan X. An agenda-setting theory of electoral competition. The Journal of Politics 2016; 78(4): 1170–1183.
Ahmed LA, Ryan JM. Same-sex marriage. Journal of GLBT Family Studies 2016; 73(1): 23–29.
Graham KT. Same-sex couples: Their rights as parents, and their children’s rights as children. Santa Clara Law Review 2008; 48(4).
Yang X, Chen B, Maity M, et al. Social politics: Agenda setting and political communication on social media. Social Informatics 2016; 4(3); 330–344.
Bernstein M. Same-sex marriage and the assimilationist dilemma: A research agenda on marriage equality and the future of LGBTQ activism, politics, communities, and identities. Journal of Homosexuality 2018; 2(1): 6–10.
Mitchell M. Book Review: Discourse, Identity, and Social Change in the Marriage Equality Debates. By Karen Tracey. New York: Oxford University Press; 2016. Law & Society Review 2018; 52(1): 278–280.
Kemmis S. Participatory action research and the public sphere. Educational Action Research 2006; 14(4): 459-476.
Fraser N. Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text 1990; 8(3): 17–21.
Dahlgren P. The internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication 2005; 22(2): 147–162.
Chambers S. Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science 2003; 18(6): 307–326.
Loader B, Mercea D. Networking democracy? Social media innovations and participatory politics. Information, Communication & Society 2011; 14(6): 757–769.
Hauser GA. Features of the public sphere. Critical Studies in Media Communication 1987; 4(4): 437–441.
Fung A. Survey article: Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy 2003; 11(3): 338–367.
Dalton RJ. Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political Studies 2008; 56(1): 76–98.
Castells M. The new public sphere: Global civil society, communication networks, and global governance. Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science 2008; 616(1): 78–93.
Dahlberg L. The internet and democratic discourse: Exploring the prospects of online deliberative forums extending the public sphere. Information, Communication & Society 2001; 4(4): 615–633.
Papacharissi Z. The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society 2002; 4(1): 9–27.
Charles GE, Fuentesrohwer LE. Habermas, the public sphere, and the creation of a racial counterpublic. Michigan Journal of Race & Law 2015; 21(1): 1–21.
Aviram H. Make love, now law: perceptions of the marriage equality struggle among polyamorous activists. Journal of Bisexuality 2008; 7(3–4): 261–286.
O’Connor C. Appeals to nature in marriage equality debates: A content analysis of newspaper and social media discourse. British Journal of Social Psychology 2017; 56(3): 493–514.
Rostosky SS, Riggle EDB. Marriage equality for same-sex couples: Counseling psychologists as social change agents. Counseling Psychologist 2011; 39(7): 956–972.
Anderson J, Georgantis C, Kapelles T. Predicting support for marriage equality in Australia. Australian Journal of Psychology 2017; 69(2).
Rainey SS. In sickness and in health: Cripping and queering marriage equality. Hypatia 2017; 32(1): 230–246.
Ashforth BE, Mael FA. Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review 1989; 14(1); 20–39.
Eyssel F, Loughnan S. It don’t matter if you’re black or white? Social Robotics 2013; 3(7): 11–16.
Meek J. LGBT and the theory of dissonant identity priming. Political Quarterly 2018; 89(1): 150–152.
Halkitis PN. Obama, marriage equality, and the health of gay Men. American Journal of Public Health 2012; 102(9): 1628–1629.
Flores AR, Brian FH, Melissa RM. Listen, we need to talk: How to change attitudes about LGBT rights. Public Opinion Quarterly 2018; 82(1): 200–202.
Schacter JS. Courts and the politics of backlash: marriage equality litigation, then and now. Social Science Electronic Publishing 2010; 82(6): 1153–1223.
Nejaime D. Marriage equality and the new parenthood. Harvard Law Review 2016; 129: 1185–1266.
Armenia A, Troia B. Evolving opinions: Evidence on marriage equality attitudes from panel data. Social Science Quarterly 2017; 98(1): 185–195.
Riggle EDB, Drabble L, Veldhuis CB, et al. The impact of marriage equality on sexual minority women’s relationships with their families of origin. Journal of Homosexuality 2017; 65(9).
Copyright (c) 2020 Yuhanyin Ma
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to the journal agree to publish their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License, allowing third parties to share their work (copy, distribute, transmit) and to adapt it, under the condition that the authors are given credit, that the work is not used for commercial purposes, and that in the event of reuse or distribution, the terms of this license are made clear.
