A controversy is defined as “a prolonged public dispute, debate, or contention; disputation concerning a matter of opinion” (“controversy”). A good controversy, however, is a debate that sparks a significant and powerful response from both sides of the argument. Such reactions may include anger, resentment, allegiance, or fervent support, and these passionate reactions often put the conflicting sides into direct and heated contention. It is through these feelings that a broader audience is attracted, convinced, and then held to either point of view. Once such an audience is reached, the debate or contention is fully established in a public forum as a controversy. When this occurs, the controversy is then contested, debated, and discussed by the community. Both sides will supply and distribute materials via the media and publications, which contain arguments and evidence that support their claims. Distribution also aids in educating and attracting an even broader audience. Furthermore, once the controversy has reached such a scale, an agreement or conclusion is not easily achieved. Neither side will generally yield to the other, and so, compromises are uncommon. A great controversy will often result in an impasse, with neither side winning an advantage or achieving complete success. Throughout time, certain controversies may fade into the background, but significant events or breakthroughs can easily resurrect the old ideas and once more bring them to the forefront of public debate.
Thus, in order to determine whether or not a debate is suitable of consideration for the history of public controversy project, groups should consider the following questions:
What is the context of the controversy? How did it begin? Where did it begin? Why did it begin? How were the two positions established? What is the duration of the controversy? Are there particular organizations, individuals, or communities that lead each respective side of the debate? Why?
What are the stances? Is there a grey area that needs to be considered and analyzed? If so, how does it impact the success of the two predominant positions?
Have these positions evoked passionate responses? If so, why are such passionate evoked? What about the controversy compels individuals into action? Are these responses successful?
What does each side uphold? What is their evidence? Do they appeal to certain members of society? Who is their audience?
What are the impacts of the controversy?