Two things when it comes to abortion and the media: 1) Journalists are undeniably pro-choice, more so than the public at large and 2) Pro-lifers are given to exaggerated fears of media conspiracies of silence as a result. “The MEDIA,” I will hear, “are DELIBERATELY SUPPRESSING pro-life stories x, y, z.”
It’s almost certainly true that they are. But then there are cases where [insert pro-life story here] wasn’t a terribly newsworthy one. And finally, given that reality, pro-lifers are getting savvy to the notion that we have to try harder. Write better. Be more active. Etc. I’m not saying the media aren’t silent on items where they ought to report. They are. However, I’m accepting that this is the case and saying pro-lifers should engage in “a little less conversation, a little more action,” in the words of the One Eternal King, by whom I mean, naturally, Elvis. (Which we are and it’s resulting in greater coverage, more fair coverage, one story at a time.)
That was by way of intro to say that there is some special kind of silence happening on the Gosnell case in the States. I agree with this column. The abortion distortion is at major play here. Were the topic anything other than abortion, this story would indeed be front page news. But it’s awkward, isn’t it, when your support of “abortion rights” conflicts with the cold, harsh reality of what that looks like.
You don’t have to oppose abortion rights to find late-term abortion abhorrent or to find the Gosnell trial eminently newsworthy. This is not about being “pro-choice” or “pro-life.” It’s about basic human rights. The deafening silence of too much of the media, once a force for justice in America, is a disgrace.