Blog Archives
NY Times Finally Sends Reporter to Gosnell Infanticide Trial
NY Times Finally Sends Reporter to Gosnell Infanticide Trial, Cites ‘Experts’ Denying Cover-Up
A mere month after the trial began, the New York Times has, under pressure, sent a reporter to Philadelphia to cover the trial of abortionist Kermit Gosnell on charges of mass infanticide. 
Trip Gabriel did indeed file from Philadelphia on Tuesday, under an unusual headline conceding that “Online Furor Draws Press to Abortion Doctor’s Trial.”
But his location was mostly irrelevant, as he only pinned two and a half paragraphs from what happened in court on Monday to the end of his report. Most of the story was a recap of the trial’s “grisly details,” accusations from “conservatives” that the media was ignoring the story, and defenses from unlabeled liberal media “experts” denying a coverup.
Through four weeks, prosecutors have laid out evidence against Dr. Kermit Gosnell, a Philadelphia abortion provider on trial on charges of killing seven viable fetuses by “snipping” their necks with scissors and of causing the death of a pregnant 41-year-old woman during a procedure.
The grisly details drew mainly local attention. But after an online furor that the case was being ignored by the national news media because of troubling accounts of late-term abortions, reporters from major newspapers and television networks descended Monday on the Court of Common Pleas. It was the latest example of the power of social media to drive a wide debate, similar to the attention paid to a rape trial last month in Steubenville, Ohio, that resulted in the conviction of two teenage football players.
In recent days, the case has become a political cause célèbre, kicked off by a commentator for Fox News, Kirsten Powers, who wrote in USA Today that “when Rush Limbaugh attacked Sandra Fluke,” a pro-contraception activist, “there was nonstop media hysteria,” but in the case of Dr. Gosnell, there was only a “deafening silence” that was disgraceful.
On Twitter, conservatives began a campaign to prod more coverage. Mollie Hemingway, a columnist for Christianity Today, asked individual health journalists directly why they were ignoring the story.
Gabriel managed to indentify the Washington Times as conservative, but not the suddenly high-profile, controversial left-wing magazine Mother Jones as liberal, or anyone else who rushed to the media’s defense. The word “liberal” didn’t appear in a story that somehow avoided stating the obvious conservative explanation for the media ignoring the story: Liberal bias.
But others noted there had been scant coverage in conservative news outlets. Kevin Drum, a political blogger for Mother Jones, pointed out that one conservative paper, The Washington Times, had published one wire-service article about the trial and seven stories “complaining that other media outlets aren’t covering the trial.”
Kelly McBride, an expert on media ethics at the Poynter Institute, said she saw no evidence of any cover-up, simply confusion by news editors over whether the story merited national attention. “One of the ways the news media knows how to cover a story these days is because of the attention in social media,” Ms. McBride said. “That’s how people judge whether there’s an appetite for a story.”
The Lame Stream Media isn’t interested in the truth or facts that goes against their infanticide agenda.
Limbaugh: If Boston bomber a Muslim, ‘media will circle the wagons’
WARNING!!! Should the culprit be a Muslim, however, the media will go out of their way to protect the image of Islam,” Limbaugh predicted.
“Let me ask a question — again based on my observation in recent years — if you listening to this program, if you are a Muslim and it turns out that a Muslim did bomb the Boston Marathon, how do you feel? I dare say that if you are a Muslim, you can be pretty certain, you can rest assured that everybody in the media will circle the wagons and say this is not because of Islam,” Limbaugh said.
“This is a lone bad actor, lone wolf, but this in no way says anything about Islam,” he continued. “This in no way says anything about Muslims. It’s just a lone nut, and they will remind that the vast majority of people denounce this kind of terrorism, the vast majority of Muslims. So if you’re a Muslim and it turns out to be a Muslim bomber, you will be in no way associated with it, which [is] fair.”
But he warned that if the bomber is some sort of conservative extremist, conservatives will be in the crosshairs of that same media.
“However, folks, if you are a conservative and it turns out that whoever did this is either real or has an imagined connection to conservatives, everybody in the media will unite to denounce your whole group,” Limbaugh said. “There will not be the same treatment. If this turns out to be some crazy extremist, domestic — everybody thought to be in that guys group is going to be tarred and feathered as well. And believe me, that’s what they are all hoping for on left.”
