MSM doesn’t like LIFE

2013_01 Thousands rally

I didn’t see any reports of numbers for the Gun Control March, but the USA Today article did say this:

“Marchers walked through the city in a line that stretched roughly two blocks.”

The numbers I saw for the Pro Life March ranged between “at least 300,000” to “over 500,000”, with even the liberal media reports admitting this year was “as big or bigger than last year”, while organizers said it was the biggest EVER.

I found this time lapse video of the 2011 Pro Life March. The camera guy’s note says that marchers were walking past him for an incredible 1 hour 31 minutes! (I wonder how many minutes it takes “a line that stretched roughly two blocks” to walk past a single point?)

How biased is the media on this issue? Well …

… the New York Times print edition has ignored the annual Pro-Life march in Washington entirely for five years running.

… in the last 10 years, when referencing either the march or the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, network news shows have used the word “life” only twice. Twice in 22 stories. Twenty-two stories total in 10 years on three broadcast networks that show news both morning and evening.

The Associated Press institutionalized the MSM’s pro-abortion bias with its famous style manual that instructed journalists to use “anti-abortion” rather than “pro-life” and “abortion rights” instead of “pro-abortion” or “pro-choice.”

The Washington Post and The New York Times both took this to the totally absurd length of actually changing Richard Doerflinger’s JOB TITLE. Doerflinger is Associate Director of Pro-Life Activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. WaPo and the New York Slime called him “Associate Director of Anti-Abortion Activities.”

When Republican strategist Juleanna Glover identified herself as “deeply pro-life” in an interview, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell interrupted with, “Well, what I would call anti-abortion … to use the term that I think is more value neutral.”

We accurately describe the horrific loss of 6 million Jews as a Holocaust. But to the American media, 54 million dead babies is “value neutral.”

It’s not “neutral” values. It’s not ignorance. It’s out and out, eye-popping, mind-boggling Media MALPRACTICE.



Filed under Abortion, Life Issues, Media Bias

12 responses to “MSM doesn’t like LIFE

  1. Unbelievable. I need to start praying harder for the NY Times building to be struck by lightning. Or swallowed by a sinkhole. Or infested with honey badgers.


  2. Violet

    Value-neutral?! We need to stop letting the left control the phraseology that shapes public opinion. When they insist on ‘value-neutral’ terms, we need to persistently correct them, and call it what it is. They are not ‘pro-choice’, they are pro-infanticide.


  3. GP

    It reminds me of the Glenn Beck rallies. My lib SIL lives just outside of DC. I was talking to her the day of the GB God and country rally and she was saying how she had to drive into the city to help my niece move. She loathes traffic. I asked her how she planned to get around the big rally.
    She said she had not heard about it!
    They really do live in their own little bizarro world.


    • chrissythehyphenated

      That really is bizarre! You’d think at least for traffic purposes, the LOCALS would get notified about major demonstrations, even if the national media won’t report on them.


    • chrissythehyphenated

      EXCERPTS: The totality of broadcast network evening newscast coverage of the pro-life march was 15 seconds from Brian Williams on NBC. Meanwhile, on ABC, Diane Sawyer devoted 28 seconds to a supposed controversy over complaints Subway’s “foot-long” subs are sometimes only eleven inches long.


  4. Credit where credit is due: National Public Radio not only covered the March for Life, but it did so in a remarkably even-handed manner, and actually referred to the participants as “pro-life” rather than the more usual “anti-abortion.” NPR has never been a friend to conservatives, Christians, or pro-lifers, but it did give this event surprisingly fair coverage… unlike most other LSM outlets.


    • chrissythehyphenated

      Good to know. I have a local gf who listens to NPR. She told me they had a show about the HHS mandate that actually discussed religious freedom.


      • I’ve listened to public radio for decades, despite their leftist bias, because I love classical music and I hate commercials, and the local public radio stations (Minnesota and Wisconsin) are the only ones that play the kind of music I like. This means I get NPR’s version of the news, and I have to say that it has changed perceptibly over recent years. It’s still left wing, but they do sometimes make an effort to be fair to the right. Unfortunately for them, their long-established leftist slant has earned them a devoted following of diehard leftists who are affronted and outraged every time they try to be fair to conservatives. I’ll never forget in 2010, after Republicans took over Congress and started talking about possibly defunding NPR and CPB, the folks at NPR’s All Things Considered panicked, and they started trying to be a little overtly less left-wing. They even did an interview with Paul Ryan where they actually treated him respectfully and let him speak without interrupting him or making disparaging comments — in other words, they treated him just as they would have treated a liberal Democrat member of Congress. ATC was inundated with angry letters from listeners who excoriated them for not having done a hatchet job on that despicable Paul Ryan. One angry listener delivered the ultimate putdown: “I felt like I was listening to Fox!”