Detecting Media Bias

Detecting Media Bias
Name:
Subject:
Date of Submission
Detecting Media Bias
The recent introduction of "religious freedom" in Indiana and Arkansas is attracting a lot of attention from the American society. As evidence, different author have published media articles on the subject. In fact, Jones and Peters (2015) and Campoy (2015) have published articles on the subject. It is because Jones and Peters (2015) published an article called "Indiana Governor Wants to Clarify Religious Freedom Law," while Campoy (2015) published an article called "Arkansas "religious freedom" Bill Goes to Governor" in the Wall Street Journals. It is notable that the topic suggests the articles were local news stories because one article discusses "religious freedom" in Indiana while the other article discusses "religious freedom" in Arkansas. This paper compares and contrasts the two articles and critics the articles by identifying fallacies and rhetorical devices present in the articles.
To begin with, both articles argue that the new law of "religious freedom" is likely to provide room for businesses to discriminate against gays and lesbians. However, the article by Campoy (2015) focuses on the possible negative effects of the law while the article published by Jones and Peters (2015) focuses on how to improve the language of the "religious freedom" law to ensure it appeals to opponents of the law. This owes to the reality that Campoy (2015) argues that the Arkansas bill can provide businesses with opportunities to deny services to gays or fail to provide contraceptives to women. On the contrary, Jones and Peters (2015) asserts that discussions in Indiana are paying attention on how to improve language of the "religious freedom" bill to correct the perception of discrimination. Further, the Campoy (2015) discusses a bill while Jones and Peters (2015) discuss a law. Simply put, "religious freedom" is already a law in Indiana, but it is in the process of becoming a law in Arkansas.
It is also notable that both authors acknowledge the existence of the "religious freedom" debate in each other’s locality. For instance, Jones and Peters (2015) assert that Arkansas lawmakers passed a "religious freedom" bill that intends to be signed by the governor. Similarly, Campoy (2015) reveals that the "religious freedom" bill in Arkansas is similar to the enacted law in Indiana. Even so, Campoy (2015) ridicules the law in Arkansas by citing uproar in Indiana, which resulted from the "religious freedom" law. Critical to the discussion is the fact that as opposed to Campoy, Jones and Peters (2015) remain positive about the law making process in Arkansas. In addition, both articles reveal that business corporations and activists oppose the religious freedom bill because it is not good for business. However, Campoy (2015) cites that protestors were urging the governor to sign the bill through peaceful demonstrations, but Jones and Peters (2015) do not mention any supporters pushing the bill into law.
It is crucial to highlight that both articles use rhetorical devices and fallacies to develop their arguments. What is the meaning of these two terms? The term rhetorical device could be elucidated as a stylistic devices used by authors to build a...