March for Life
In 2016, the media provided an embarrassing amount of coverage for the March for Life. So this year, as in years past, MRC Culture captured the crowds on camera for the American public to see the pro-life movement for themselves.
What a difference an election makes: The annual pro-life March for Life, long ignored by the New York Times, led the paper’s National section on Saturday, driven by a little political star power in the form of Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway and Vice President Mike Pence. Jeremy Peters and Yamiche Alcindor’s account was teased with a photo from the rally on the front page: “Thousands March Against Abortion.” The headline read “A Rallying Cry, and an Act of Defiance.” The text box: “Anti-Abortion Marchers Take Hope In Trump’s Outspoken Support."
It happens every year in late January -- the annual March for Life, the 44th edition happening today -- around the anniversary of the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion. It reliably draws to the nation’s capital tens of thousands of pro-lifers out into the winter cold, only to be virtually ignored by a paper that routinely gives out space to far sparser liberal protests. Yet January so far has actually brought a little bit of pro-life coverage. What will tomorrow's paper reveal about today's March for Life?
On Thursday afternoon, our friends at RedState flagged this peculiar development that ABC News refused an exchange from the David Muir-President Trump interview where Trump scolded Muir for the media’s lack of coverage of the March for Life versus the Women’s March on Washington.
When it comes to protests, the national mainstream media plays a deceptive numbers game. For instance, the press gave huge coverage to last weekend’s March for Women, which drew a reported 200,000 people protesting the Trump Administration and allegedly proclaimed solidarity with women.
Thursday on The View, the mostly liberal panel surprisingly talked about an event that ABC’s news shows routinely ignore: the annual March for Life. The hosts were respectful of the marchers but Whoopi Goldberg took issue with the march’s use of the term “pro-life.” The whole panel then made contradictory and confusing arguments then about how one could be both “pro-choice” and “pro-life.”
Wednesday night was a major first for Donald Trump as ABC aired his very first interview as President of the United States. The interview questions ranged from immigration policy to what carpet he chose for the Oval Office (Ronald Reagan’s), but things got awkward for interviewer David Muir when he tried to stick Trump with questions about the Women’s March on Saturday, “Let me just ask you while we’re standing outside, could you hear the voices from the Women's March here in Washington.”
It’s called adding insult to injury: pro-life women (and men) have not only been rejected by the Women’s March on Washington but also by the liberal media. This month, two similar events are happening in Washington, D.C. Both pertain to women. One attracted an estimated 500,000 Americans this year, the other boasts tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands marchers every year. But one main difference – a difference the media care about – is agenda: one is pro-abortion, the other is pro-life.
The pro-life group Live Action continued its history of exposing Planned Parenthood this week with a new video reporting they contacted 97 Planned Parenthood clinics across the organization's 41 affiliates where undercover recording is legally allowed, and only five said they offered any form of prenatal care.
That doesn't match the public record, as its video notes Planned Parenthood boss Cecile Richards stating in 2011 that prenatal care was included in the list of "the kinds of services that people depend on Planned Parenthood for."
EToday the Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues announces its second annual #CoverTheMarch campaign, calling on the media to cover the 2017 March for Life and cover it fairly. The annual event held in Washington, D.C. draws hundreds of thousands of peaceful participants from all over the country. This year's March for Life, Friday, January 27, marks the 44th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion on demand.
The media have been promoting neo-Nazis and white nationalists in hopes to (admirably) discredit them and falsely insinuate that they were far-right conservatives who propelled Donald Trump to the White House. This trend manifested itself with five minutes and 17 seconds Tuesday morning on CBS and NBC that attempted to label the neo-Nazi conference as one featuring “conservative extremist[s]” and added up to three times more coverage than they’ve had on the March for the Life in the past four years.
Thousands braved miserable conditions and an incoming blizzard to march against abortion on Friday, and the New York Times once again came up short in covering the story, though when compared to previous years there was a veritable “blizzard” of coverage. The paper’s Public Editor Margaret Sullivan chided the Times in 2014 for its sparse coverage of the annual March for Life, and recommended covering the “gathering with a staff reporter in Washington...The lack of staff coverage unfortunately gives fuel to those who accuse The Times of being anti-Catholic, and to those who charge that the paper’s news coverage continually reflects a liberal bias...” Yet 2015 march coverage amounted to a half-sentence in a hostile story, and in 2016 the paper also failed to devote a full story to the march.