Saturday, April 13, 2013

"Can you imagine the coverage if it were dogs?"

This image is from JD Mulland of the Bucks County Courier Times, who is one of the few reporters covering the Gosnell abortion-murder trial. It's the reserved seating in the courtroom for the media.

Takes your breath away.

Erik Erickson asks "can you imagine the coverage if it were dogs?"


  1. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyApril 13, 2013 at 8:23 AM

    [Stephen] Massof, who, like other witnesses, has himself pleaded guilty to serious crimes, testified "It would rain fetuses. Fetuses and blood all over the place." Here is the headline the Associated Press put on a story about his testimony that he saw 100 babies born and then snipped: "Staffer describes chaos at PA abortion clinic."

    "Chaos" isn't really the story here. Butchering babies that were already born and were older than the state's 24-week limit for abortions is the story.

    -- Kirsten Powers, USA Today

    My wife did her study abroad in Romania during the Ceaușescu years. There are striking similarities between American journalism today and the Party-directed journalism of Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe.

  2. Powerful documentary: "3801 Lancaster" (21:11).

  3. Ah, the conservative outrage du jour. Not only has this story not risen to national attention, prior to this past week, even the conservative blogosphere hardly mentioned it. Now, all of a sudden, this lack of attention is ascribed to yet another vast left-wing conspiracy. What is it with you people and conspiracy theories?


    1. To what should we ascribe the media's lack of attention?

    2. 'To what should we ascribe the media's lack of attention?'

      The dire financial state of almost all national newspapers, with their lack of journalists and funds to send reporters to cover the case directly, the reliance on local coverage, and the absence of audiovisual material for the national networks.

      There are plenty of conservative newspapers in America, in addition to liberal newspapers. What are they reporting? Is there a difference in coverage? There should be if there's supposed to be a liberal bias against covering the case.

    3. The mainstream media covered Sandra Fluke extensively, the killing of Travon Martin was headlines for weeks, stupid rape comments by Republican politicians get wall-to-wall coverage.

      The murder of hundreds of newborn babies by America's most prolific serial killer, the obvious negligence by health authorities under pressure from abortion advocates to loosen inspection standards, gets the cone of silence.

      Bachfiend: do you think you might see something amiss here?

    4. Bach:

      Do you think that a serial killer who killed hundreds of abortion "providers" over several decades, and kept their body parts in jars as souvenirs, would be ignored by the mainstream media?

      Compare the media coverage of these murders of newborns by an abortionist to the media coverage of the murder of Matthew Shepard. Compare it to the coverage of the killing of Travon Martin, where the media actually faked 911 tapes to make the killing seem racially motivated.

    5. Michael,

      So what are the conservative newspapers in America reporting about this case? You should have evidence from this source if there's a liberal conspiracy against reporting this case.

      I expect that there will be more extensive reporting with the verdict and sentencing.

      Putting forth hypotheticals means nothing. The other cases you mentioned were newsworthy, to the extent that they had audiovisual material (for example Sandra Fluke testifying), had controversy (the conservative reaction to her testimony), involved politicians (who aren't the most interesting of characters, with their public persona being usually rigorously managed, so if they say anything controversial - read interesting - that's what's going to get attention) or involved non-pursuit by legal authorities of a possible crime and the LACK of national media attention (the George Zimmerman case got international attention before it got national American attention).

      Put up or shut up. What are the conservative newspapers reporting?

    6. I don't read "conservative newspapers", because 1) I don't read newspapers 2) I don't know of any conservative newspapers. There are liberal and less liberal newspapers. Conservative? I know of none.

      You don't actually have an argument, bach. The mainstream media silence on Gosnell is obvious. You should be owning up to it, and condemning it, instead of making silly arguments to excuse it.

      But then to do that, you would need integrity.

    7. Michael,

      You don't have conservative newspapers in America? Admittedly, if you are so conservative that Attilla the Hun would be regarded as liberal, then all newspapers would be liberal.

      You don't have the Murdoch press in America? In Australia, all the News Limited newspapers are conservative, running the conservative line without exception (the Australian is the worst example).

      You should be able to find some conservative newspapers. Newspapers develop a market niche to exploit (like species). There won't be an unfilled market which includes 47% of the market, as Romney got in the election.

      You have a hypothesis. 'The liberal press is refusing to cover the trial as a result of an agenda'. To prove it, you need to be able to potentially disprove it. By citing that's its being covered in the conservative newspapers.

      Anyway, you're exhibiting confirmation bias +++, by asserting that there aren't any conservative newspapers because you don't read newspapers.

    8. The lack of coverage speaks for itself. The only question is how honest will abortion supporters like you be on the issue.

      The answer is clear just as clear as the cover-up.

    9. Michael,

      You're the one who is claiming that the liberal media is covering this case by not reporting it wall to wall. If you want to establish this hypothesis then not only must you establish that the liberal media isn't covering the case, but that also the conservative media (and America does have a conservative media) is covering the case extensively more.

      My reading of the case is that Gosnell was not only performing abortions but was also breaking the law. And the health department was extremely negligent in not inspecting his premises.

      What sort of abortion supporter am I? I think women should have limited choice, up to 20 weeks gestation, as a maximum. Abortion shouldn't be encouraged. It's a surgical procedure with significant complications for the woman. It should be a reluctant last resort.

    10. How about "birth" , as a reluctant last resort?

    11. Michael,

      "How about 'birth', as a reluctant last resort?"

      I'd actually agree with you to some extent. Women have the right to 'choice' in the first 20 weeks of gestation. After that, she loses the right to choice.

      It's not a matter of abortion or no abortion. It's a matter of legal abortion or illegal abortion.

      Do you really think that abortion wasn't occurring before Wade versus Roe?

      Abortion shouldn't be encouraged. It's a surgical procedure after all, with risks. But it should be available, well regulated and made as safe as possible, because otherwise you'll be getting more of these cases (Gosnell certainly wasn't well regulated).

  4. Wait a minute, according to my understanding of the conservatives, this whole episode is emblematic of abortion and all abortion is pretty much equivalent to this case. It’s always murder no? By pointing this out as an especially horrific abortion situation, you tacitly admit that run-of the-mill abortions are not as egregious, and that in fact some abortions are less heinous than others.


    1. KW,

      Nonsense. We see here only the tip of the iceberg.
      We see a sloppy monster. The more clinical and clean ones are just as murderous.

      At All,

      I am against the death penalty in 99.9% of all cases.
      I would not assassinated al-Awlaki, but I would hang Gosnell.

  5. If it were dogs, from the coverage you'd think it was the second coming of Michael Vick.