On January 25 I reported that a CBS slide show entitled, “Activists Hold Annual March For Life On Roe v. Wade Anniversary,” curiously contained no photos of pro-lifers, only seven shots of pro-aborts protesting in front of the Supreme Court building.

Well, CBS apparently found its missing roll of film. Reported Chicago Now today:

Pro-life advocates like Jill Stanek were incredulous and it wasn’t long before the comments section on the CBS website exploded with pro-lifers crying foul. Dozens of unhappy commenters remarked on how badly the bias of CBS galled them.

Finally a day or so later, CBS altered its slide show and added some photos of some of the actual participants of the pro-life march. The slide show now features 7 photos of pro-lifers and an equal amount of pro-abortion supporters.

Interestingly, though, there was no notice and no explanation by the CBS affiliate that it altered/added to the slide show and no explanation why the slide show had no pro-life photos for the first few days it was live on the web.

Pro-lifers can take heart that they were heard by the TV station causing it to take action to correct the sleight. But the fact that CBS put up a slide show of photos taken at a pro-life rally but didn’t feature a single photo of any pro-lifers pretty much shows the bias from which the TV station came when it initially posted the webpage.

But even with the alteration, we still see CBS’ bias. After all there were 500,000 pro-life supporters and a paltry few hundred pro-infanticide supporters yet CBS gives them equal treatment as if they were the same.

Yep, the bias still reigns.

Actually, there were several hundred thousand marchers. And GetReligion.org reports the pro-life photos actually went up three days after the March.

In other news, Washington Post’s ombudsman agreed his paper’s photo coverage of the March was also wanting:

[Y]ou can find images of the large crowd taken by amateurs on Flickr or Facebook, and I imagine the AP took some, too. Probably Post photographers did as well.

But these shots didn’t find their way into the main Web photo gallery on the march. And I think this is where The Post fell down in its coverage of the march this year. And that’s mostly what antiabortion readers wrote to me about.

The online photo gallery contains 10 photos: seven tight shots of antiabortion demonstrators, two of protesters from the small abortion-rights counter-demonstration on the steps of the Supreme Court and one that showed both sides confronting each other there. In fact, eight of the 10 shots were taken at the high court….

I would have chosen more from the broad expanse of the rally, and at least one photo showing a lot of cheerful, festive people….

Vernon Loeb, Post Local editor, said, “In retrospect I wish we had given readers a better sense of the overall magnitude of the march… it was far larger than 17,000.”