A LAW THAT ECHOES

Digital and Political Echo Chambers Regarding Roe v. Wade

30. DESEMBER 2023

Candidate number: 380
Technology & Society
FINAL ESSAY
STKD 66-10
Introduction
At a certain point, a person may begin to exist more online than in person. To the average person, it
might not seem like a cell phone is much more than what it was specifically constructed for. However,
in recent years, a phone has become an integral part of our society. From a portable television, library
card, buss card to sometimes even the key to unlock your front door. Today, most of a person’s life is
documented by technology, whether in the form of social media communities, or a series of
advertisements specifically tailored to an individual’s interests. What happens when the consumer
becomes the consumed?

The polarization surrounding the overturning of the Roe v. Wade proposal has led to several echo
chambers within social media. People are being consumed by their own thoughts and viewpoints, echoed
back at them through social media platforms as the government plays a crucial role.

In the 21st century the digital communication has led to many long-term debates that have become highly
polarized. One escalated debate is the Roe v. Wade overturning. A lawsuit which was filed in Texas by
a woman named Norma McCovey in 1969. In her desperate need of wanting an abortion at the time, it
was impossible so accomplish because it was in violation of the prevailing laws. The lawsuit was filed
by Norma, under the pseudonym Jane Roe, which is the story behind Roe in Roe v. Wade. The history
behind Wade can be traced back to a man called Harry Wade. A district attorney on the opposing side
of the suit representing the state of Texas. In summary Roe was arguing that the law which Texas was
enforcing at the time was unconstitutional based on the Ninth Amendment in the Bill of Rights (Jones,
2022). Which means that people can retain rights to things that are not specifically addressed by the
constitution or bill of rights. The district court in Texas agreed to Roe’s proposal causing victory in the
case. However, the state of Texas never placed that injunction on this law, preventing its enforcement
and consequently, resulting in no actual change. Everybody’s laws are still the same and nobody has
access to abortion in Texas. Afterward, the case was filed to the Supreme Court of United States, based
on the lack of injunction from the Texas government which invalidated the entire ruling. In the end Roe
achieved a large majority ruling, where an individual’s right to privacy outlined in the 14th Amendment
supersedes a state’s right to ban the termination of pregnancies (Jones, 2022).

The ruling federally protects the right to first trimester abortion without any restrictions or bans. In this
case the choice of restrictions and bans are depending on the stage of pregnancy. Throughout history the
debate has occurred between two groups; those who advocate for rights-based pro-life perspectives and
pro-choice activists (Ziegler, 2009). Usually, this division is based on political positions between the
House of Democrats and Republicans. Before Roe v. Wade, states and territories had laws that were
prohibiting or restricting abortion, but when Roe became a landmark in the Supreme Court it essentially
made these laws invalid (Northup et al., 2023). Today’s debate is about overturning the Roe v. Wade
law which happened in June 2022. Making it legal for states to ban abortion outright and reenforcing
old abortion laws, effecting the country in two main ways. In some states this might result in the
acknowledgement that abortion bans were never unconstitutional or obstructed by the courts (Northup
et al., 2023). In other states that previously limited pre-Roe abortion laws, can now take legal action
asking the courts to activate an enforce the old abortion laws (Northup et al., 2023). Actions in the
surrounding the overturning of Roe v. Wade is actively portrayed through social media platforms and
internet newspapers. Streaming this information as a pro-life activist will make the algorithm of the
corresponding views and values of this person, while the opposite may occur to a pro-choice supporter.
Usage of contemporary media is most common in high income democracies, where life is increasingly
happening in digital, mobile, and platform-dominated media environments. Universal use of mobile
devices, contribute to over a half of the time spent with digital media. Major US-based platforms like
Google, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, hold a significant share of digital consumption
(Northup, 2023). There is an abundant supply of news online, but on average, people spend a limited
amount of time with it and many internet users do not actively seek out online news (Arguedas, 2022).
Differences in individual choices and regular habits affect the overall distribution of news consumption,
provoking greater inequality. Social scientists use the term echo chamber to describe a particular
situation influenced by availability and distribution of media, as well as an individual’s own preference.
As mentioned in the following literature review echo chambers can be defined as “a bounded, enclosed
media space that has the potential to both magnify the messages delivered within it and insulate them
from rebuttal” (Arguedas, 2022). For instance, the left seeking out pro-choice information that
reinforces their pre-existing beliefs in media and people on the right pro-life side never coming across
centrist or left-wing perspectives that challenge their pre-existing beliefs (Arguedas, 2022). Division of
media can lead to huge polarization in debates like overturning of Roe v. Wade.

In this essay, ideas related to feedback loops will be explained and applied to the debate of abortion law
in the US. Polarization is a huge part of the American society which is a perfect example of how media
can affect societal values in life. To compare the different partisan attitudes a rhetorical and political
analysis will be conducted regarding values in pro-choice and pro-life. Media debates will be presented
through activists with big platforms on social media and their arguments will be compared to facts and
pre-existing legal information about Roe v. Wade. Political content can be favoured to everyone through
potential algorithmic bias, existing because of previous data searches. Information becomes easily
believable because of the use of argumentation. It is imperative to analyse the rhetorical methods behind,
to improve critical thinking of the news supply on the platforms. Methodologies that are employed
involve a combination of rhetorical analysis, political analysis, and critical discourse analysis.

Body
Most Americans disapprove of the U.S. Supreme Court landmark ruling overturning Roe v. Wade
decision. Public support for legal abortion remains the same as before the debate became active, with
62% saying it should be legal in all or most cases. Nearly six in ten adults (57%) disapprove of the
court’s sweeping decision, including 43% who strongly disapprove. About four-in-ten (42%) approve
of the court’s decision and 25% strongly approve. In recent years, the gap in partisan opinions regarding
the legality of abortion has expanded, leading to a huge division between Republicans and Democrats
in their initial perspectives on the court’s decision. Particularly most Democrats (66%) strongly
disapprove of the recent court decision on abortion, with a total disapproval rate of 82%. In contrast,
predominant amounts of Republicans approve of the decision with 48% expressing strong approval. A
Pew Research Centre survey revealed that 62% of women disapprove of the decision while 21% strongly
approves. On the contrary 52% men are expressing disapproval and 47% approval. The survey was
conducted from June 27th to July 4th on the nationally representative American Trends Panel (Pew
Research Center, 2022).
Democrats are widely perceived as pro-choice party, while the Republicans are generally perceived as
pro-life party which seems apparent to even an informal observer of American politics. Correlation
between the evolution of the abortion issue in terms of political participation in the United States
emerges from scientific research. This research led the formulation of models such as Carmines and
Stimson’s model (Carmines & Gerrity, 2010) which describes the process of political debates which
often goes unnoticed by the public. An issue transitions from the political environment to partisan
politics, meaning individuals engaging in strong political views. gets attributed to an elite actor who
frames the matter in patrician terms and advocates for a given solution. A case can become a part of a
heated debate resulting in something called “a critical moment” rise which describes two polarized
points of view who are disagreeing in terms of the issue (Carmines & Stimson, 1986).
Observing the ongoing debate, both sides include individuals that take on prominent roles in shaping
the discourse by intaking a strong political position. Employing both private and official media platforms
to engage with the public. Their aim is to distribute perspectives and convince their followers to adopt
corresponding points of view or agree to pre-existing values. Lila Rose is a well-known media advocator
for those who participate in the approving side of the overturning of the framing. Live Action is an
organisation founded by Lila Rose, for advocation of pro-life. Due to her immense dedication, she has
called out to the United Nations to address human rights abuse of abortion and set a resolution to, what
is stated, the murder of children in the womb (Live Action, 2023). In this video she states the following
"If human rights do not apply to human life in the womb, they apply to no one. If our youngest child is not
considered worthy of these rights, why then do the rights matter for anyone? We must do better. We can do
better. To live up to the great ideals of this Declaration." (Live Action, 2023). One can interpret this
citation as a tactical rhetorical method which applies to the listeners’ feelings. In this citation she is
referring to article one of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states “All human beings
are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act
towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” (United Nations, 1948)

Argumentation on Live Action is also built up from religious beliefs and thereby applying to individuals
with corresponding values, resulting in an echo chamber effect. Live Action has an official channel on
YouTube, with videos made to confirm their point of view by surveying people. Usually, these
individuals are selected due to their overlapping opinions. Live Action has also conducted interviews
with individuals from groups with predetermined opinions. One example is about how abortion has
affected St. Bethany Madonna and The Sisters of Life. This is a foundation of nuns that was founded in
1991 by John Cardinal Connor and its members are women who lay their life down in prayer for life.
Their main operations are serving women who are vulnerable during abortion. These women and others
can spend their pregnancy in the abbey. Sisters of Life are walking with pro-lifers that feel
misunderstood and abortion survivors, renewing their hearts from despair (Live Action, 2023). Abortion
is described in following words by St. Bethany Madonna and Lila Rose “Abortion had always been an
abstract issue, a political debate topic, for Sr. Bethany Madonna. Until the day a friend invited her to
pray in from of an abortion facility. Young women wrapped the building looking lost and defeated.
Abortion now had a face.” (Live Action, 2023)

The proponents of a pro-life perspective emphasize emotional argumentation while pro-choice mostly
relies on legal and logical ramifications. Individuals who disagree with the overturning of Roe are
women, and their opposition about having the ability to make their own decisions about their health care
and their reproductive rights. Some merely view Roe v. Wade as an optimalization of a woman’s right
to choose. This is not dictated by the government. The only woman that is pro-choice in all Congress is
Kim Schrier, and on Forbes Breaking News she states: “The decision to become a mother is the single
most important decision a woman can make, and it should be under their premises” (Schrier, 2022). Not
only is having a choice imperative for future living conditions but nevertheless health benefits and
consequences must be examined. In contrast to pro-life argumentation, Schriner is attacking the problem
with logic, she is also using her position to advocate for what she believes. Kim Shriners pro-choice
perspective provides an emphasis on women’s autonomy in the decision-making regarding motherhood.
In 1992 there was another court case called Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Here, the nonprofit
organisation Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania, that provides reproductive health care and
sexual education in the United States, and globally. For this reason, they were presented with a lawsuit
for providing abortions (Wharton et al., 2006). The Supreme Court backed away from affording women
the highest level of constitutional protection for choosing abortion. Surprisingly the core objectives of
Roe v. Wade are still preserved by instituting the “undue burden standard”. Measuring the
constitutionality of restrictions on abortion (Wharton et al., 2006). The standard was litigated by Casey,
being the opposing side of this court. Implying the undue standard has made it difficult for states like
Pennsylvania to discount laws, like informing husbands about abortions and reporting requirements.
The court stated that this new test was meant to genuinely support women and protect their reproductive
rights (Wharton et al., 2006). Every time a new rule is proposed in a case it creates a domino effect in
other similar cases which then shows results. Here, this led to even more restrictions on women’s access
to abortion, for instance some of them include long waiting periods and long patient procedures that
doctors must follow. The overall result of this court case can be interpreted as pro-choice because of the
discussion of the benefits of women’s reproductive liberty. However, certain restrictions have led to
situations where people with miscarriages are being charged (Wharton et al., 2006).

A recent case from Ohio illustrates a very specific instance of applying legal constraints that lead to
misinterpretations. Here, legal action is being pursued against a woman for experiencing a miscarriage
in her residence and subsequently flushing the toilet (Valenti, 2023). The woman in question reported
feeling a strange sensation in her abdominal area, prompting her to use the restroom where the
miscarriage occurred. Eventually local persecutors deemed her choice of flushing the toilet as callous
and indicated a lawsuit against her. This information was being discussed in a TikTok video made my
Jessica Valenti where she also stated the following “This woman’s defence lawyer is emphasized that
she is a 33-year-old girl with no prior criminal charges and is now facing government censure for
distressing event beyond her control.” (Valenti, 2023) Valenti proceeds to explain that there was a
forensic pathologist involved in this case that examined the fetus claimed that it was already dead before
entering the birth canal (Valenti, 2023). Additionally, this opens an interpretation that it was not the
woman’s fault and it happened naturally without her forcing the miscarriage, which is an illegal act in a
lot of states (Huss et al., 2023). Subsequently the point of view is completely switched out with claims
about criminalization and demonization of reproductive rights for black women and how it is traced
back to the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Valenti states the following “they’re going to try to make it
seem like this is not about abortion this is a hundred present about abortion because the judge in this
case decided to bring up the first amendment of Ohio state.” (Valenti, 2023) Sources from the video are
suggesting that it is factual that individuals that are self-managing abortion are criminalized and
frequently reported to the police by people who they entrusted (Huss et al., 2023). “The report found
that 1,396 criminal arrests of 1,379 people took place over the 16.5 years between January 1 st, 2006,
and June 23rd, 2022” (Huss et al., 2023). It is important to consider that the gestational stage where a
fetus becomes a child is a subjective matter, which is overall heavily misunderstood in this debate.
Examples on rhetorical techniques used in this debate which were presented above can, to some degree
explain the apparent polarization of opinions on the topic. Even though the public may not be aware that
they are a part of a political bubble, presented evidence shows elements of feedback loops trough media.
Individuals will place themselves in the echo chamber unintentionally, by revisiting the same channels
or trying to examine presented topics by themselves using sources provided by the mainstream. Data
algorithms on platforms can form biases based on revisiting the same political content. Creating a front
page with videos or images that will fit our point of view in politics and debates such as this one.

Conclusion
Despite recent U.S. Supreme Court decision public opinion remains consistent with (62%) continuing
to support legal abortion, with 42% disapproving of legal abortion. Democrats show strong disapproval
(66%) and Republicans approve of the decision with (48%) expressing strong approval. A survey
indicates a gender divide, with 62% of women disapproving with 52% men also disapproving of the
decision. The statistical evidence compiled proves that there is a correlation between partisan status and
viewpoints in the abortion debate.
Democrats are perceived as a pro-choice party, while the Republicans are perceived as a pro-life party.
Scientific research shows that there is a correlation between the evolution issues in terms of political
participation. This advances polarization. A case can become a part of a heated debate resulting in a
critical moment. This critical moment has been seen frequently in the media, specifically on the pro-life
side. Lila Rose is one of the most known media advocators for those who participate in the disapproving
side of legal abortion rights. This is supported by the YouTube channel Live Action. Evidence conducted
from YouTube shows that a pro-life perspective is merely based on religion and morals. A pro-life
standpoint contends that a fetus has human rights in any gestational stage, which is subjective.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey instituted the “undue burden standard” for measuring the constitutionality
of restrictions on abortion. Implying the undue standard has made it difficult for red states like
Pennsylvania to discount laws. The overall result of this court case is pro-choice because of the benefits
on women’s reproductive liberty. In addition, certain restrictions have led to situations where people
with miscarriages are being charged. A recent case from Ohio was filed against a woman for
experiencing a miscarriage in her residence and subsequently flushing the toilet. Eventually local
persecutors deemed her choice of flushing the toilet as callous which prompted a legal action against
her. Additionally, it was not the woman’s fault and it happened naturally without her forcing the
miscarriage, which is an illegal act in a lot of states. individuals that are self-managing abortion are
criminalized and frequently reported to the police by people who they entrusted. Evidence from this
very case provides a widening gap between public opinion and abortion rights.
Overall provided evidence and information shows that there is a domino effect caused by the overturning
of Roe v. Wade because a lot of cases have provided restrictions on legal abortion. It appears that the
number of requirements to take an abortion seems to grow in many states, while other states have made
abortion completely illegal. This has also affected negative pregnancy outcomes as the fetus seems to
have more rights than a woman. Even though the public may not be aware of being part of an echo
chamber, the argumentation itself and the way it is presented can still be considered a feedback loop.
This evidence presents a dangerous precedence for the future if the American systems continues to
follow the evolution of issue transitions. Continuing to influence the society in this way will cause
polarization to spread and become even broader from one state to another.

Reference list
Arguedas, A. R. (2022, January 19). Echo Chambers, filter bubbles, and polarisation: A
literature review. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/echo-chambers-filter-bubbles-and-polarisation-
literature-review

Northup, N. (2023, August 16). Abortion laws by State. Center for Reproductive Rights.
https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/

ZIEGLER, M. (2009). The Framing of a Right to Choose: Roe v.

Wade and the Changing Debate on Abortion Law. Law and History Review,
27(2), 281–330. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40646016

Democrats, H. (2022, June 24). Chairman Jeffries Statement on the Extreme Supreme
Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. House Democrats.
https://www.dems.gov/newsroom/press-releases/chairman-jeffries-statement-on-the-
extreme-supreme-court-decision-to-overturn-roe-v-wade

Jones, D. (2022, May 16). Doctor explains Roe vs Wade - what overturning means for
Health & Autonomy in pregnancy. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHrxSUgLvvA

Pew Research Center. (2022, July 6). Majority of public disapproves of Supreme
Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics &
Policy. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/07/06/majority-of-public-
disapproves-of-supreme-courts-decision-to-overturn-roe-v-wade/
Carmines, E. G., & Stimson, J. A. (1986). On the Structure and Sequence of Issue
Evolution. The American Political Science Review, 80(3), 901–920.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1960544

CARMINES, E.G., GERRITY, J.C. and WAGNER, M.W. (2010), How Abortion Became a
Partisan Issue: Media Coverage of the Interest Group-Political Party Connection. Politics &
Policy, 38: 1135-1158. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2010.00272.x

Live Action. (2023, November 18). Lila Rose addresses the United Nations, calls for
human rights protections for unborn children. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5_s42LCoko

Live Action. (2023b, November 28). Watch her mind change on abortion | giving
Tuesday. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/g5Nv-c14wt4

United Nations. (1948, December 10). Universal declaration of human rights.

https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-
rights?fbclid=IwAR0qZRqns2xoYIgxCk_iZiNPWbyKaZmxslCPC5-v4-
OMPdsMwiKo5-hC388

Live Action. (2023a, November 1). Complete dedication to saving families from
abortion w/ St. Bethany Madonna. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrpSv68DZgg

Schrier, K. (2022, July 18). “I’m the only pro-choice women doctor in all of Congress”:
Kim Schrier Champions reproductive rights. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSVtd4Stg5I

Wharton, L. J. W. J., Frietsche, S., & Kolbert, K. (2006). Preserving the Core of Roe.
Reflections on Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 18(2), 318–386.
https://doi.org/https://openyls.law.yale.edu/handle/20.500.13051/6952

Huss, L., Diaz-Tello, F., & Samari, G. (2023, October 30). New research: Self-care,
criminalized (Executive summary). If/When/How.
https://www.ifwhenhow.org/resources/selfcare-criminalized/

Valenti, J. (2023). Jessica Valenti on TikTok. TikTok.

https://www.tiktok.com/@auntiekilljoy/video/7307049563951516971?_r=1&_t=8hnHC
H9aS3c&fbclid=IwAR36PMsw3YiFp1ZdXbnh59EgpNHt-
cQoPgn_XMfwUvHXQd6Ovh7bPSSC69k

Kavattur, P. S. K. (2023). (rep.). The Rice of Pregnancy Criminalization (1st ed., Vol. 1,
Ser. 1, pp. 1–67). New York, The New York state: Pregnancy Justice.
https://www.pregnancyjusticeus.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/9-2023-
Criminalization-report.pdf