Needed: Honest Reporting on the Pro-Life March/Cause

At the March for Life on January 22, 2009, the estimates range from 200,000 to over 300,000 men, women, and children present as pro-life witnesses. For many in the mainstream press, however, the event never happened.

WASHINGTON (Catholic Online) - There's a saying around Washington that if an event isn't covered by the news, it never happened. Each year this is the battle fought by those organizing the March for Life. How do we get noticed? It is a battle that all pro-life organizations face each day. As far as many news services are concerned, these events never happen and these people really don't exist.

Don Feder, a respected journalist and columnist recently observed that the New York Times completely ignored this year's march once more.

"More than 300,000 people assembled in Washington, D.C. (January 22) for the 36th Annual March for Life. But as far as The New York Times is concerned, it never happened," Feder observed.

He continued, "If 50,000 feminists had gathered on the Mall in D.C., to demand passage of the so-called Freedom of Choice Act, it would have been above-the- page-one-fold coverage in The Times, accompanied by an aerial photo of the crowd.

"Notwithstanding that the March for Life is the largest annual event of its kind in D.C., the Times didn't even run a few sentences on it in the National Briefing box, which summarizes U.S. news."

Feder served as this year's keynote speaker for the Rose Banquet, a part of March for Life's annual activities. He also takes particular interest in the actions of the New York Times as editor of the website, Boycott the New York Time (www.boycottnyt.com).

Tim Graham from the Media Research Center made these observations in his column on Newsbusters:

* ABC, NBC, CBS did not run any stories about the March or the anniversary of Roe vs Wade.

* National Public Radio cited the anniversary but made no mention of the March.

* Fox News ran a "fair-and-balanced" report with people from both sides of the issue.

* CNN stated that rallies and protests from both sides were being planned.

* Most newspapers (except the New York Times) did cover the anniversary and the March a story. The Washington Post story was inside the A Section.

The Washington Times was one of a handful of print and online news organizations that gave a credible amount of coverage to this year's event.

In checking previous filings by the Media Research Center, the 2009 March for Life has been treated with about the same amount of coverage as previous years.

The pro-life movement has been working hard to find new ways to get the attention of local, regional and national outlets. Some point to many familiar "media myths" as part of the reason for negative press. These myths include such things as improper assumptions on the stance of pro-life advocates regarding non-embryonic stem cell research as well as an inaccurate understanding of abortion methods and its long-term impact on the mothers physically and emotionally.

Fox News Religion Contributor, Fr. Jonathan Morris, wrote on his blog at Fox News that he believes that the reasons for a lack of coverage are primarily due to economic reasons.

He writes: "My point in explaining how economic pressures influence editorial choices is to challenge fellow pro-life proponents to spend less time complaining about media blackouts and to retool their media strategy. The following are my reflections and suggestions in this regard:

"1) We must keep in mind the media doesn't like anniversaries because anniversaries, by definition, are not news (whatever is being remembered, already happened).

"2) Annual events, like the March for Life, have a similar obstacle to overcome. In television, "annual" is synonymous with "nothing new".

"3) Getting bigger numbers each year to an annual event is not enough to change this fact. First time events, if they are big enough, and events that change the game may be considered newsworthy.

"4) Even if abortion is a "hot" topic, the debate is not media friendly for two reasons:

a) Most viewers think they already know the arguments of both sides

b) The issue is profoundly personal and painful for every adult involved in those 50,000,000 abortions."

Fr. Morris pointed out on his blog that even MSNBC would run the March for Life in primetime if it would unseat the ratings of Bill O'Reilly. The rest of his discussion on this subject can be read at: http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/01/23/frj_abortion/

John-Henry Weston, of LifeSite News, told Catholic Online that the bishops may hold one of the keys to better coverage by using influence with their local media outlets.

"Have the cardinals and bishops in attendance ask their local media to join them for the March for Life in Washington and promise them great quotes in return.

"Save all their best (read strongest) language for those media who cover the March," Weston went on to say. "The mainstream media, is interested in interesting news, non-boring news. Since there are usually over 30 bishops and archbishops and 4 cardinals at the March for Life, the media potential is there."

Given the current climate in Washington, Pro-life leaders and organizations are going to be working overtime on both on their message and media strategies. The battle for the unborn continues to rage and the war of words is a part of it.

----
Randy Sly is the Associate Editor and Home and Family Editor for Catholic Online. Randy is also a communications specialist. He and his wife live in the growing area referred to as the "Washington, D.C. Metroplex".

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online