BiasWire: Disposable Babies
Wire services like AP and Reuters matter in that the feeds they provide are often cut-and-pasted into daily newspapers to fill space. Moreover, their stringers are often relied upon to be "eyes on the ground" for newspapers which lack the wherewithal to do their own reporting in a given area. Their copy gets propagated, often without editing, throughout the MSM.
In BiasWire, a recurring feature, we'll be taking a deep dive on a wire story of interest to investigate how the biases of the wire service correspondents infect an enormous swath of the media.
In this installment, we'll look at an AP Breaking News wire story.
Abortion makes for a great faultline in investigating media bias. Here's the first hint: whether an unborn child is labelled a baby or a fetus is a very contentious issue in the pro-life/pro-choice debate. Pro-lifers say it's a baby. Pro-choicers say it's a fetus. Notice that the reporter uses "fetuses" without any indication (such as the scare quotes they typically employ when using one side's favored label). Interestingly, the headline refers to Roe v. Wade as the "Supreme Court's Abortion Decision", which of course is absolutely correct. The language could have been even more strongly worded as "woman's right to choose", I suppose.
Note the rewriting of history here. Roe v. Wade did not make abortion legal---it made laws prohibiting abortion illegal. There's a difference. Pre-Roe, one could travel to any number of states which permitted abortion to get one. Moreover, even in states where abortions were illegal, providers were available (although they have since been demonized as "back alley abortionists"). Moreover, the reporter refers to nebulous "criticism" from unnamed sources to couch the accusation that this church was "exploiting women's grief to make a political statement." So it's the Church that's political, and the women who are grieving---gotcha.
If there was only a handful of protestors, it couldn't have been as hard to count them as it was to count the 250 parishioners. We also get to hear the opinion of the protestor(s)through the sign, but do not get an excerpt from the prayer here.
Which abortion clinic? Is there only one in Colorado? In Boulder? And if this has been going on for years, how is it news? How is it controversial? Is it because the abortionist---oops, I mean "clinic director"---just found out about it and called AP?
Note also the nice, clinical "dispose of the fetuses" line the reporter uses. I love it when the MSM has a whiff of the jackboot in their phrasing. I suppose "inter the remains" would have been too sentimental.
Okay, so we've got up to 1,000 abortions, but "seven bags" of remains from miscarriages. The cynic in me wonders if the reason we're not given a ballpark on the number of miscarriages is that we could then compare it to the number of abortions and judge for ourselves if the "rare" part of "safe, legal, and---" holds sway here. Also, if the Church is burying unborn children, regardless of whether they were aborted or miscarried, how is that a political statement?
Note how the reporter chooses "Organizers" over such friendlier terms as "Clergy" or "Church members" or the like. Political events have "organizers", you see. I'm fairly certain these "organizers" did not call the unborn children "fetuses" either, or they might even have been quoted. It is interesting that the Church folk want to provide a ceremony for women who have had abortions to "grieve and mourn"---given that the "clinic director" seems to have handed off these remains without any thought given to such a ceremony, given his confusion over what was to be done with the remains.
Could the reason for the public service have anything to do with wanting to give women who've had an abortion a chance to attend and mourn? What is the big deal about the day after the 32nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade? There's nothing magic about 32, and Church services do tend to happen on the Sabbath. Was this somehow out of cycle for these type of ceremonies?
How many? This reporter seems to have trouble with simple counting. I have no doubt that women who are not devastated by having an abortion may well be devastated by news of a religious service, but one wonders how they discovered this fact in the first place. Might Planned Parenthood have been involved, or Dr. Hern? As to their "understanding of what would happen with the fetuses", what was it? We're not told, and it apparently isn't on Dr. Hern's website. Funny that Dr. Hern didn't see fit to mention his specialty when the reporter asked him about the church service. Is partial birth abortion available at his clinic? We're not told, despite the battle being waged over it in Congress.
If he didn't return a message seeking comment, how did he call the service "a cynical exploitation of private grief for political purposes?" Moreover, on what does he base his assessment that the Church is acting cynically or politically here? We at least get a quote from an attendee, who notably does not use the word "fetus," but rather "girl or boy." The reporter also gives this person the last word, which is certainly fair.
Perhaps the aforementioned website can shed more light.
Ahh, yes, there's the tagline regarding specialization the reporter found through a deep dive of the site's main page (it's in the upper right hand corner, big as life).
Let's dig a little deeper. From the About Us page we learn Dr. Hern isn't just the clinic's director, but a practicing abortionist:
Is it me or does the "strong supports [sic] of reproductive choice and freedom" line sound a bit political? It's one thing to provide a medical service as best you can; quite another to require your staff to share your philosophy of the same. Might Dr. Hern have a political agenda to drive his outrage? Nah, I'm just cynical. And political.
Now waitaminute! "Makes a statement...personally involved...in advocacy of reproductive freedom..." all sound pretty darned political to me, but the last paragraph is the dead-nuts clincher. In it, we learn that the clinic "observes" the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, that the director believes it to be a "landmark decision for human freedom" and that he defines "family values" as "the freedom to choose your own life and values with those you love." Sounds pretty political to me.
Yet in the article he was presented as a medical bureaucrat concerned only for his patients...odd.
A review of the medical services page reveals that the clinic performs abortions up through 36 weeks (9 months) since the last menstruation. Here's something interesting:
Hmm, if the abortion clinic staff can recognize that there is some debate as to whether unborn children are fetuses or babies, perhaps the AP reporter might? It's interesting that the good Dr. is against having any sort of ritual, ceremony, or grief at his facility. I wonder if this fuels his anger on the subject to some extent. As nobody has asked him, I'll keep wondering.
Still digging, I find this on another page of the website:
It seems the good "clinic director" was opposed to the Partial Birth Abortion Act and submitted an official statement at the request of two Colorado senators. Not that that's political or anything.
He's actually quite the politico. This page lists his recent articles. Here's a couple of titles to provide the flavor of his work:
December 21, 2004
"What's intelligent about this design?" The Daily Camera.
July 30, 2004
"Ronald Reagan And Abortion" The Colorado Statesman.
October 22, 2003
"Did I violate the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban?" A doctor ponders a new era of prosecution. Slate.com
January 25, 2002
"Repressive abortion policy of Owens and GOP is similar to Taliban's 9th century attitudes. The Colorado Statesman, Commentary
March 31, 2001
Free speech that threatens my life. The New York Times Op-Ed page, Saturday, March 31, 2001.
January 31, 2001
"A Doctor's Fear"
The New York Times, Letter to the Editor and response from the Chairman of the House Republican Conference.
January 21, 2001
"GOP will attack abortion rights"
The Daily Camera (Boulder, Colorado), Guest Editorial.
Well, you get the idea. It might have been nice to know that the fellow accusing churchgoers of cynicism and politics was himself a political activist.
Now, I'm not going to attack Dr. Hern, his practice, or his beliefs. He has a right to all three, and Roe v. Wade and subsequent Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land, like it or not. I am sure that he is as dedicated to the safety of the women who enters the doors of that clinic as he maintains he is. I'll further maintain that if women are going to have abortions, the abortion procedure should be as safe as it possibly can be for them. No sense compounding the tragedy here with two deaths instead of one.
I do think that Catherine Tsai ought to be taken to task for trying to present Dr. Hern as apolitical, while inferring without any evidence presented at all that the Sacred Heart of Mary Church personnel are political creatures.
Here is the Church's website. I defy you to find anything political on it, in stark contrast to Dr. Hern's.
Regardless of how one feels about abortion, we ought to expect better than sloppy, biased reporting from our media.
In BiasWire, a recurring feature, we'll be taking a deep dive on a wire story of interest to investigate how the biases of the wire service correspondents infect an enormous swath of the media.
In this installment, we'll look at an AP Breaking News wire story.
Jan 23, 2005
Church Buries Hundreds of Fetuses a Day After 32nd Anniversary of Supreme Court's Abortion Decision
By Catherine Tsai
Associated Press Writer
Abortion makes for a great faultline in investigating media bias. Here's the first hint: whether an unborn child is labelled a baby or a fetus is a very contentious issue in the pro-life/pro-choice debate. Pro-lifers say it's a baby. Pro-choicers say it's a fetus. Notice that the reporter uses "fetuses" without any indication (such as the scare quotes they typically employ when using one side's favored label). Interestingly, the headline refers to Roe v. Wade as the "Supreme Court's Abortion Decision", which of course is absolutely correct. The language could have been even more strongly worded as "woman's right to choose", I suppose.
BOULDER, Colo. (AP) - A Roman Catholic church buried the ashes of hundreds of aborted fetuses Sunday, a day after the 32nd anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision that made abortion legal, drawing criticism that the church was exploiting women's grief to make a political statement.
Note the rewriting of history here. Roe v. Wade did not make abortion legal---it made laws prohibiting abortion illegal. There's a difference. Pre-Roe, one could travel to any number of states which permitted abortion to get one. Moreover, even in states where abortions were illegal, providers were available (although they have since been demonized as "back alley abortionists"). Moreover, the reporter refers to nebulous "criticism" from unnamed sources to couch the accusation that this church was "exploiting women's grief to make a political statement." So it's the Church that's political, and the women who are grieving---gotcha.
A crowd of 250 parishioners prayed as the ashes were buried in the Sacred Heart of Mary Church cemetery, while a handful of protesters gathered nearby holding signs that read, "This church is a grave robber."
If there was only a handful of protestors, it couldn't have been as hard to count them as it was to count the 250 parishioners. We also get to hear the opinion of the protestor(s)through the sign, but do not get an excerpt from the prayer here.
A mortuary hired by the abortion clinic to dispose of the fetuses had been giving the ashes to the church for years to be buried at a memorial. Dr. Warren Hern, clinic director, said he had no idea such an arrangement had been made and said his contract required the mortuary to bury the ashes in its own plot.
Which abortion clinic? Is there only one in Colorado? In Boulder? And if this has been going on for years, how is it news? How is it controversial? Is it because the abortionist---oops, I mean "clinic director"---just found out about it and called AP?
Note also the nice, clinical "dispose of the fetuses" line the reporter uses. I love it when the MSM has a whiff of the jackboot in their phrasing. I suppose "inter the remains" would have been too sentimental.
The church agreed to return the remains of 300 to 500 fetuses that had been cremated in November before the service began Sunday. The church had been planning to bury up to 1,000 fetuses. Seven bags containing remains from miscarriages also were buried.
Okay, so we've got up to 1,000 abortions, but "seven bags" of remains from miscarriages. The cynic in me wonders if the reason we're not given a ballpark on the number of miscarriages is that we could then compare it to the number of abortions and judge for ourselves if the "rare" part of "safe, legal, and---" holds sway here. Also, if the Church is burying unborn children, regardless of whether they were aborted or miscarried, how is that a political statement?
Organizers said they wanted to give the fetuses the burial they deserved and provide a place for women who have had abortions to grieve and mourn.
Note how the reporter chooses "Organizers" over such friendlier terms as "Clergy" or "Church members" or the like. Political events have "organizers", you see. I'm fairly certain these "organizers" did not call the unborn children "fetuses" either, or they might even have been quoted. It is interesting that the Church folk want to provide a ceremony for women who have had abortions to "grieve and mourn"---given that the "clinic director" seems to have handed off these remains without any thought given to such a ceremony, given his confusion over what was to be done with the remains.
"I think they misunderstand what we're doing," service organizer Susan LaVelle said. She said the parish has held unannounced burials twice a year since 2001, but the parish priest agreed to make the burial public this year.
LaVelle said the timing of the service so close to the Saturday anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision was a coincidence.
Could the reason for the public service have anything to do with wanting to give women who've had an abortion a chance to attend and mourn? What is the big deal about the day after the 32nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade? There's nothing magic about 32, and Church services do tend to happen on the Sabbath. Was this somehow out of cycle for these type of ceremonies?
But Kate Horle, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, has said many of Hern's patients were devastated by the news of a religious service.
"Our concern is for the women who had personal relationships with Dr. Hern and their understanding of what would happen with the fetuses," she said. "That trust was violated with a third party."
Horle said most of Hern's patients have fetuses with fatal anomalies. His clinic specializes in "late abortion for fetal disorders," according to its Web site.
How many? This reporter seems to have trouble with simple counting. I have no doubt that women who are not devastated by having an abortion may well be devastated by news of a religious service, but one wonders how they discovered this fact in the first place. Might Planned Parenthood have been involved, or Dr. Hern? As to their "understanding of what would happen with the fetuses", what was it? We're not told, and it apparently isn't on Dr. Hern's website. Funny that Dr. Hern didn't see fit to mention his specialty when the reporter asked him about the church service. Is partial birth abortion available at his clinic? We're not told, despite the battle being waged over it in Congress.
Hern did not immediately return a message seeking comment Sunday, but called the service last week "a cynical exploitation of private grief for political purposes."
Doug Kramer, 18, said his family attended the burial because his sister considered an abortion 14 years ago but instead gave her baby up for adoption.
"It's great to bring this out to the public," he said. "The word needs to be spread. Abortion does stop a beating heart. It's not giving a girl or boy a chance at life."
If he didn't return a message seeking comment, how did he call the service "a cynical exploitation of private grief for political purposes?" Moreover, on what does he base his assessment that the Church is acting cynically or politically here? We at least get a quote from an attendee, who notably does not use the word "fetus," but rather "girl or boy." The reporter also gives this person the last word, which is certainly fair.
Perhaps the aforementioned website can shed more light.
Ahh, yes, there's the tagline regarding specialization the reporter found through a deep dive of the site's main page (it's in the upper right hand corner, big as life).
Let's dig a little deeper. From the About Us page we learn Dr. Hern isn't just the clinic's director, but a practicing abortionist:
It is my opinion, as a practicing physician, that the provision of abortion services must first meet the highest standards of medical care and surgical safety. It is also critically important that the woman who seeks this service must feel that she is being cared for at every point by health care professionals who are not only empathetic to her needs but who are also strong supports of reproductive choice and freedom. All staff members who help me with this work at Boulder Abortion Clinic are selected with these criteria in mind.
Is it me or does the "strong supports [sic] of reproductive choice and freedom" line sound a bit political? It's one thing to provide a medical service as best you can; quite another to require your staff to share your philosophy of the same. Might Dr. Hern have a political agenda to drive his outrage? Nah, I'm just cynical. And political.
By its name and continued existence, Boulder Abortion Clinic makes a statement that women are free to make their own choices about their own lives, bodies, and family needs. I have been personally involved from the beginning of my medical career in advocacy of reproductive freedom, and I continue in this commitment. We have survived anti-abortion harassment and violence and shown our determination to provide these services in spite of everything. As a result, our patients are protected by the highest standards of safety and security when they come to my office.
As we have recently observed the 31st anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade decision, we know we have done our part to make the meaning of that landmark decision for human freedom a reality for our patients and their families. The true meaning of "family values" is the freedom to choose your own life and values with those you love.
Warren M. Hern, M.D.,M.P.H., Ph.D.
Director, Boulder Abortion Clinic
Now waitaminute! "Makes a statement...personally involved...in advocacy of reproductive freedom..." all sound pretty darned political to me, but the last paragraph is the dead-nuts clincher. In it, we learn that the clinic "observes" the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, that the director believes it to be a "landmark decision for human freedom" and that he defines "family values" as "the freedom to choose your own life and values with those you love." Sounds pretty political to me.
Yet in the article he was presented as a medical bureaucrat concerned only for his patients...odd.
A review of the medical services page reveals that the clinic performs abortions up through 36 weeks (9 months) since the last menstruation. Here's something interesting:
One of the main differences for third trimester patients having a pregnancy terminated for fetal anomaly is that they may wish to have an intact fetus that they can examine and hold as part of the grief process. For many of these patients, it is not a fetus - it's a baby. The woman and her family may request special procedures such as special religious ceremonies, genetic studies, formal autopsy, private cremation, or private burial. We can arrange for any or all of these special procedures upon request.
While these procedures or ceremonies can be arranged upon request, we do not expect or require any patients or families to go through any special rituals, ceremonies, or grief process at Boulder Abortion Clinic. Dr. Hern believes that the patient's own family, physician, and religious counselors are better prepared to provide these kinds of support at home in most cases.
Hmm, if the abortion clinic staff can recognize that there is some debate as to whether unborn children are fetuses or babies, perhaps the AP reporter might? It's interesting that the good Dr. is against having any sort of ritual, ceremony, or grief at his facility. I wonder if this fuels his anger on the subject to some extent. As nobody has asked him, I'll keep wondering.
Still digging, I find this on another page of the website:
STATEMENT
of
Warren M. Hern, M.D., M.P.H., Ph.D.
Director
Boulder Abortion Clinic
1130 Alpine
Boulder, Colorado 80304
Assistant Clinical Professor
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology
University of Colorado Health Sciences Center
Denver, Colorado 80220
Before the Judiciary Committee
of the
United States Senate
Concerning S. 939
17 November 1995
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to submit a statement to this body concerning S. 939, the so-called "Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act" of 1995. I appreciate the invitation to prepare a statement that came to me from Senators Kennedy, Biden, and Specter as members of the Judiciary Committee. I also deeply appreciate the joint request by Senators Hank Brown and Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado that I be given an opportunity to testify in person and that my remarks be inserted in the record. Since I was not permitted to testify in person, I request that this written statement be entered into the record as per the requests by Senators Brown and Campbell.
It seems the good "clinic director" was opposed to the Partial Birth Abortion Act and submitted an official statement at the request of two Colorado senators. Not that that's political or anything.
He's actually quite the politico. This page lists his recent articles. Here's a couple of titles to provide the flavor of his work:
December 21, 2004
"What's intelligent about this design?" The Daily Camera.
July 30, 2004
"Ronald Reagan And Abortion" The Colorado Statesman.
October 22, 2003
"Did I violate the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban?" A doctor ponders a new era of prosecution. Slate.com
January 25, 2002
"Repressive abortion policy of Owens and GOP is similar to Taliban's 9th century attitudes. The Colorado Statesman, Commentary
March 31, 2001
Free speech that threatens my life. The New York Times Op-Ed page, Saturday, March 31, 2001.
January 31, 2001
"A Doctor's Fear"
The New York Times, Letter to the Editor and response from the Chairman of the House Republican Conference.
January 21, 2001
"GOP will attack abortion rights"
The Daily Camera (Boulder, Colorado), Guest Editorial.
Well, you get the idea. It might have been nice to know that the fellow accusing churchgoers of cynicism and politics was himself a political activist.
Now, I'm not going to attack Dr. Hern, his practice, or his beliefs. He has a right to all three, and Roe v. Wade and subsequent Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land, like it or not. I am sure that he is as dedicated to the safety of the women who enters the doors of that clinic as he maintains he is. I'll further maintain that if women are going to have abortions, the abortion procedure should be as safe as it possibly can be for them. No sense compounding the tragedy here with two deaths instead of one.
I do think that Catherine Tsai ought to be taken to task for trying to present Dr. Hern as apolitical, while inferring without any evidence presented at all that the Sacred Heart of Mary Church personnel are political creatures.
Here is the Church's website. I defy you to find anything political on it, in stark contrast to Dr. Hern's.
Regardless of how one feels about abortion, we ought to expect better than sloppy, biased reporting from our media.
1 Comments:
This post has been removed by the author.
Post a Comment
<< Home