June
20 The Next Column

Perhaps motivated by poll numbers showing ever-growing acceptance of same-sex unions, particularly among those in the all-important younger demographics, reporters focused on getting heart-tugging personal stories and not the carnival of protest.

During June, Gay Pride Month, there is plenty of cringing and consternation in the gay community as TV news crews seemingly can’t resist focusing on the antics of a pride parade — the strange brew of drag queens posing as cheerleaders and gramps in leather chaps.

But as the marriages got under way in the early evening on June 16 and local stations broke away for live wedding coverage in San Francisco and Los Angeles, the spectacle of attention-seekers and protesters was muted as the ceremonies commenced.

In his City Hall office, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom performed the ceremony for Del Martin, 87, and Phyllis Lyon, 84, who have been together longer than Newsom has been alive. On the steps of the Beverly Hills courthouse, a female rabbi presided over the union of Robin Tyler, 66, and Diane Olson, 54, as TV crews elbowed each other to get the best shots of the tears streaming down their faces and the ceremonial crushing of a glass.

Protesters holding picket signs stood just a few steps away, and at least during the ceremony, it was as if camera operators did their best to crop out their presence. Apparently aware of their bit part, the opponents kept quiet as vows were exchanged.

“At some point, the coverage shifted from wanting to capture the historic moment to actually ‘getting’ in their hearts how significant it was to finally have your relationship recognized by society and under the law,” says Karen Ocamb, a veteran journalist for L.A.’s IN Magazine who has covered gay issues for longer than marriage has been on the radar screen.

Even Drudge Report, not one to back away from the sensational, headlined with “Diane and Robin Wed in L.A.,” with a closeup photo of Tyler and Olson’s hands as one ring went on the other’s finger.

The same tinges of the ordinary were also true in Bakersfield, a city so conservative that teachers have been under recent threat of having to teach “intelligent design.” But as marriages commenced, the local CBS affiliate struggled to even find a protester — just a lone woman holding a handmade sign. As the first couple went to get their marriage license, the clerk who processed them looked more worried about when she would get to go home than of the couple in her midst.

Full disclosure: My partner and I, too, are talking about taking the plunge, but it’s amazing how quickly thoughts of historic import give way to the familiar debate over big wedding vs. small.

Obviously, the groups fighting a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, which is on California’s ballot in November, couldn’t be happier about the images from the week.

“Once couples were featured in the news getting married, our opponents could no longer prey on the fear of the unknown,” says Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, one group that has long pushed for same-sex marriage.

With one recent poll showing that state voters would reject the ban, there’s confidence after a long record of losing such arguments at the ballot box. Kors says they have not yet asked Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who opposes the constitutional amendment, to appear in ads, but they could be an effective way of reaching out to voters.

“This is early in a political campaign for television advertising,” Kors says. “Right now, I think there is more than ample earned media. The more people talk about this, the more it (goes) in our direction.”

Yet as much as images of commitment and family and, dare I say, normalcy reign, the opposition is mounting its own well-funded effort. On the day of the weddings, gay-marriage opponent Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel warned on radio of the effect of child-rearing in motherless and fatherless households.

Just as some gay leaders cringe at images of pride parade kookiness, opponents are well aware of a backlash that could come if their gay-marriage foes come across poorly. On the ProtectMarriage.com website are tips for anyone who may be asked by the media about their beliefs. Along with the advice of answering questions “calmly and slowly,” even to a hostile question, is this tip: “Don’t quote Bible verses to a secular audience (which will be the case in media interviews); make your case based on Christ-honoring truth, but avoid quoting verses unless that is the nature of the question.”

Opponents are well aware of the need to hone the message and, like their counterparts, provide the media with fewer opportunities for caricature.

Undoubtedly, the past week shows that coverage is changing, to the point where the temptation to stereotype is subjected to ridicule.

As Takei and Altman sat for an interview on CBS, the network ran a “Star Trek” clip of a bare-chested Sulu brandishing a sword. On Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” Jon Stewart got in a dig: “Seventy-nine ‘Star Trek’ episodes and … you have to pick the one where Takei fences shirtless?”