Washington Post: “We should have sent a reporter sooner”
We believe the story is deserving of coverage by our own staff, and we intend to send a reporter for the resumption of the trial next week. In retrospect, we should have sent a reporter sooner.
~ Martin Baron, Executive Director of the Washington Post, speaking about the trial of accused mass murderer abortionist, Kermit Gosnell, April 12, this after WashPo reporter Sarah Kliff deemed it a mere “local crime”
Description of photo (click to enlarge), via J. D. Mullane of phillyburbs.com:
Three rows of seats reserved for the media remained empty Thursday morning April 11, 2013 in courtroom 304 at the Justice Center in Philadelphia where abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell is on trial, charged with seven counts of murder for killing seven born-alive children, and also a patient. The man at the rear of the courtroom is David P. Williams, of Delaware Right to Life, who covered the trial for his pro-life blog.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“In retrospect, we should have sent a reporter sooner.”
Well, duh.
All crime is “local” crime!
As mea culpas go, this one leaves a lot to be desired.
That photo of the empty benches reserved for the ‘journalists’ tells the story.
The caption should read: THE SILENCE IS DEAFENING
Can anyone provide a single incidence where any of the gaggle of lap dog stenographers have asked the obamateur a solitary question concerning Kermit Gossnell?
More DEAFENING SILENCE
The media was too busy covering mr. bo-jangles most recent bit of pufferry when he used the families of the Sandy Hook massacre as props in his propaganda war against gun owners.
http://www.npr.org/2012/12/16/167412995/transcript-president-obama-at-sandy-hook-prayer-vigil
“This is our first task — caring for our children. It’s our first job. If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right. That’s how, as a society, we will be judged.
And by that measure, can we truly say, as a nation, that we are meeting our obligations? Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children — all of them — safe from harm? Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know that they are loved, and teaching them to love in return? Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose?
We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change. We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true. No single law — no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society.
But that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely, we can do better than this. If there is even one step we can take to save another child, or another parent, or another town, from the grief that has visited Tucson, and Aurora, and Oak Creek, and Newtown, and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that — then surely we have an obligation to try.”
“Let the little children come to me,” Jesus said, “and do not hinder them — for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.”
Charlotte. Daniel. Olivia. Josephine. Ana. Dylan. Madeleine. Catherine. Chase. Jesse. James. Grace. Emilie. Jack. Noah. Caroline. Jessica. Benjamin. Avielle. Allison.
God has called them all home. For those of us who remain, let us find the strength to carry on, and make our country worthy of their memory.”
Wow! What beautiful sentiments. They wouldn’t be any more beautiful if mr. bo-jangles actually believed them.
Meanwhile can anyone provide a single incidence where the obamateur has utterred a single solitary comment concerning Kermit Gossnell?
A VOID OF SOUND.
If sound were light, there would be nothing but utter darkness.
If the Washington Post/New York Times had been there to cover Jesus walking on the water and they published a photo or provided a video of the event, the headline would have read:
ITINERANT EVANGELIST CAN’T SWIM
Reminds me of Newsweek’s (in)famous coverage of the Duke lacrosse case:
“the narrative was right, but the facts were wrong”.
How about telling us just the facts, without editorializing
or censoring out anything you think we aren’t meant to know, and letting us draw our own conclusions?
G. Gordon Liddy called it the Washington ComPOst. In fact that’s how I remember the difference between this rag and the more reasonable Washington Times.
All crime is a hate crime!
No wonder the media loves Obama so much. They’re all empty chairs too, just like him.
Were the reporters that Fox News sent to cover this trial on their lunch break when that picture was taken?
What hypocrisy. Now that a fellow liberal, Kirsten Powers, comes forward and calls them out for not covering this most newsworthy story, other liberals are starting to come out with their excuses and “oopsies”. Had she said nothing, would any of them have come forward? Ever?
Joan, I don’t know. But they did cover the trial a couple weeks or so ago, on O’Reilly, Hannity, and Huckabee, if not more shows.
And I’ll be watching to see if the Washington Post does actually start covering and reporting on this story now.
“We should have sent a reporter sooner.” Gee, do you think? And while you are at it try sending a reporter (and photographer) to the next March for Life.
“Were the reporters that Fox News sent to cover this trial on their lunch break when that picture was taken?”
Joanarchania,
Yeah, their lunch break runs from 9-noon and 2 to 5. They cover the trial from noon to 2.
Get off your ample lazy obama and ‘Google’
Obama, Kermit Gosnell ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX, Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, Time or US News
and see what it yields.
The benches are empty because the lap dog media was too busy shoving their long pointy brown noses up the posterior of the empty suit hoping to scent some fresh emanation of bovine scatulation from their dung goddess.
The media is treating this case about the same as if it was about a dentist or a plastic surgeon. Because to most people it is.
Reality, women died almost certainly due to his neglect. He allegedly spread venereal disease among his patients by improperly washing equipment. Have you even read the allegations? I realize that you and some other pro-choicers don’t care about the dead infants, but if it’s about women’s health than you guys should be all over this.
Of course I’ve read the allegations.
It’s why I keep saying abortions should be conducted in hospitals.
Unlikely to happen though while the anti-choice movement and their political pawns constantly strive to prevent the best facilities and medical people being available.
Okay, disregarding that which we aren’t going to agree on. My point is the pro-choice leaning media should be all over this one, either for the reasons you just stated or the women’s health (because the only thing important in this story to you guys is the women’s health) being damaged by some quack. The fact that it was half-ignored for a while is confusing.
“The fact that it was half-ignored for a while”
Only half-ignored? You’re being pretty generous.
I saw a few articles about it on pro-choice blogs and yada yada. Maybe it was 3/4s ignored.
“Maybe it was 3/4s ignored.”
I’ll agree to that, it sounds about accurate.
It is a little bit confusing Jack. The FauxNews types weren’t all over it either. My guess is that the pro-choice ‘names’ figured it was being dealt with by the courts and the rest of the populace simply weren’t that interested. Like I said the other day, the media reports what it thinks people will be interested in.
“It is a little bit confusing Jack. The FauxNews types weren’t all over it either. My guess is that the pro-choice ‘names’ figured it was being dealt with by the courts and the rest of the populace simply weren’t that interested. Like I said the other day, the media reports what it thinks people will be interested in.”
Eh, I think you might be right here. But it’s still confusing to me, why they would think it. I mean, everyone has some type of opinion on abortion (either positive or negative), everyone likes a good macabre story or horror show in places that are supposed to be “safe” especially if it has a racial bias angle (if some gyno who wasn’t doing abortions was spreading around venereal disease to many poor black women, I can’t see people being silent about it). I can’t understand why news outlets would ignore it, especially FOX.
“everyone has some type of opinion on abortion” – ah, but to what extent? How many only give the topic serious thought if they find themselves faced with a personal choice? How many people who would never dream of having an abortion might still tut and shake their heads when they drive past the streetside signs and people protesting against womens’ choice? How many are against abortion but don’t think others should be prevented from accessing them?
Yeah, but even those “personally pro-life” people have an opinion on the matter, even if they don’t think about it much and think that hardcore pro-lifers are nuts. I can’t imagine that anyone could read the story about Gosnell and just be meh about it, it’s certainly got a lot of elements that people like to read about. Especially confusing is how FOX wouldn’t think their viewers would be interested in this story. That demographic tends pro-life and more religious.
Maybe they just don’t see it as something which is reason enough to stop women having abortions Jack. It’s just another horror story within a particular section of the medical industry, much like others which emerge from time to time. Even if they hit the headlines they flicker out pretty quickly.
When it comes to outlets like Fox I find that if brains were dynamite they couldn’t blow the wax out of their ears.
I don’t know where you are getting that I think that the media would cover it as a way to stop women from having abortions, or that people who aren’t already pro-life see it that way. I think you’re reading something I’m not arguing or saying. I just think it’s odd how little press this got. If a plastic surgeon were spreading around disease and using outdated anesthesia and killing women, primarily women of color and economically disadvantaged women, I think it would have gotten more press than this did. That doctor who carved his initials into a woman got more press than this. That’s why I suspect it’s partially politically motivated.
No no, I’m not saying the media would cover it as a way of stopping abortion, just that most people – even mild-mannered so-called pro-lifers – wouldn’t see it in the same context as many here do.
“I suspect it’s partially politically motivated” – then there’d need to be two quite distinct reasons. One for the ‘liberal’ media and one for the ‘conservative’.
“No no, I’m not saying the media would cover it as a way of stopping abortion, just that most people – even mild-mannered so-called pro-lifers – wouldn’t see it in the same context as many here do.”
Well I agree, I just think that it might shock some of those “personally pro-life” people out of their support for legal abortion, and shock some pro-choicers into realizing there might not be enough oversight for clinics to prevent atrocities like this from happening, especially to poor and minority women.
“then there’d need to be two quite distinct reasons. One for the ‘liberal’ media and one for the ‘conservative’.”
Yeah… and I can see why more liberal bent media would ignore it but I can’t think of a reason FOX would, it fits right into the demographics they cater to.
FOX News didn’t ignore this story. At least three of their shows covered the Gosnell trial two weeks ago: Huckabee, Hannity, and O’Reilly. Did they have people in the trial press box? I don’t know. Did they cover the story. Most definitely; I watched all of them myself.
I have heard plenty about this trial as have all of my friends and coworkers, so I don’t know what you’re talking about. It was front page news on the Delaware News Journal. Yes, it is a horrible story but it is being covered!