Evaluating the credibility of the article- Gay Rights in the US: State by State

The US Guardians is a team who are a small group of designers, interactive developers and journalists that work together to produce projects onto the Guardian. Last year, the team wrote, “Gay Rights in the US: State by State”, explaining some of the big issues involving gay rights. Some of the issues they talked about were: marriage, hospital visitation, adoption, housing, employment and school bullying. Instead of writing down the facts or explaining the issues, the team offered readers information about where the states stand with the issues. The US guardians team goal was to show readers what each state thinks about the issues involving the gay rights. While ther are some aspects of the website that proved precise, the lack of depth in the analysis and the data weakened the site’s credibility.

To show readers what each state is saying or doing, the authors gives us pie charts. For example, under employment it explains that, “Anti-discrimination employment laws vary widely by state depending on the inclusion of sexual orientation or gender identity, and whether the law protects those working in the public or private sector” (US Guardians, 1). One of the problems is that the information given only gives us what the main issue is about; it does not go further and does not pose a possible solution for the issues. So readers do not know how to contribute to the issues involving gay rights.

The US Guardians — https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2012/may/08/gay-rights-united-states
The US Guardians — https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2012/may/08/gay-rights-united-states

Each main topic, the team does uses pie charts that allows us to see different regions of the United States. The only problem with the pie charts is that the team does not provide links to these sources, so the reader cannot evaulte the credibility of the data presented. So the readers would have to open another tab and go search to see if the authors are correct with their information; Which makes the readers unsure if the statistics can be trusted.

One of a good aspect of the website is that US Guardian team uses pie charts to show readers the different regions of states. This allows us to see what each states has done about each issues. For example, in the Northeast region all of the states have a law which “allows visitation by same-sex partners or spouses” (US Guardian, 1). Another example is in the Southeast has no law or law unclear about hate crimes which are “Federal hate crime laws extend protection for crimes related to one’s sexual orientation or gender identity” (US Guardian, 1). Even though they do not cite their information, the pie charts allows the readers to see what states are doing about the different issues involving gay rights.

At first glanced, the website seems credible because of the pie charts and the little bit of information about each issue. If looked further into it, the website does not site its sources or the information it gives us. Some aspects of the website were great but there was just a few aspects that lowered the credibility of the website. Overall, the website was a respectfully source if the reader wants to know what state is doing or saying involving gay rights.

  • Works Cited

Cage, Feilding, Julian Burgess, and Gabriel Dance. “Gay Rights in the US, State by State.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 08 May 2012. Web. 23 Nov. 2016.