{"id":230693,"date":"2020-09-14T08:14:33","date_gmt":"2020-09-14T13:14:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=230693"},"modified":"2020-09-13T21:11:06","modified_gmt":"2020-09-14T02:11:06","slug":"naral-complains-media-pro-abortion-language","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/naral-complains-media-pro-abortion-language\/","title":{"rendered":"NARAL complains that mainstream media doesn’t use enough pro-abortion language"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

NARAL Pro-Choice America recently released a report<\/a> claiming that the mainstream media’s coverage of abortion-related topics is… wait for it…\u00a0too pro-life<\/em>. Media outlets they examined include the New York Times, CNN, and Politico, as well as seven others.<\/p>\n

NARAL\u2019s first criticism is that political reporters, rather than healthcare reporters, usually cover abortion-related news. These reporters are more likely to quote politicians than doctors, they say, giving the impression that abortion is not a healthcare issue. (Never mind that deliberately killing innocent humans isn’t usually considered health care.) But reporters, they argue, don\u2019t do a good enough job presenting abortion as routine health care.<\/p>\n

The NARAL authors then write:<\/p>\n

Charged rhetoric from anti-choice advocates are included in coverage, oftentimes with minimal context. Nearly half of all articles analyzed included terms such as “infanticide,” “partial-birth abortion,” and “heartbeat bill,” but only a fraction of those articles provided an independent definition of the term. This trend is exacerbated on Twitter.<\/em><\/p>\n

NARAL doesn\u2019t want the media to refer to bills restricting abortion upon a detectable heartbeat as a “Heartbeat Bill,” even though those bills are frequently named “Heartbeat Bill.” Instead, they expect mainstream media outlets to say, \u201cthe so-called<\/em> Heartbeat Bill.\u201d<\/p>\n

Interestingly, NARAL says (emphasis added):<\/p>\n

Out of the 91 articles mentioning fetal “heartbeat” legislation, many articles noted that “a fetal heartbeat can be detected as early as six weeks.” But only 27 articles noted that that is typically before a woman even knows she is pregnant<\/strong> \u2014 a critical fact that gives context to the potential impact on women.<\/em><\/p>\n

In saying this, NARAL unintentionally admitted that the slogan \u201cabortion stops a beating heart\u201d is true.<\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Why has \u2018heartbeat\u2019 just become a \u2018medically inaccurate\u2019 term? Abortion.<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n