Meredith McNelis
mm132010@ohio.edu
Abortion rights have always been a hot topic in the news and
media. Whether you are anti-abortion or pro-aborition rights, passionate feelings surround
both sides. Because of such strong apposing arguments, the issue is hardly
addressed without causing great animosity between the two beliefs.
Pro-Human Rights
Abortions happen every day; this
is not news. Nevertheless, what sets this story apart from others is the gruesome
methods that Philadelphia doctor Kermit Gosnell performed. His actions
were not one of a routine abortion procedure but of murder. Yes, people who
are anti-abortion consider all abortions to be wrongful murders, but anyone with a
moral compass would consider Gosnell’s actions sickening.
The legality of the issue is what
makes this story news worthy on a national level. The news should not focus on whether abortions should be legal or not but how Gosnell chose to
execute them. Under Philadelphia
state law, abortions are not to be performed after 24-weeks of pregnancy.
While this is one law Gosnell broke, it is not his most troubling charge.
Some believe that his story has
not been in the forefront because many liberal media outlets are ignoring
the story. This has nothing to do with it. Both sides of the spectrum
failed to report on Gosnell’s clinic, so everyone is to blame. Biased reporting has
nothing to do with this issue. Being liberal or conservative should not be the
deciding factor of who covers this story. Everyone should take interest in it
and care about such a crime because it is dealing with human rights. Gosnell's story has received gross
negligence.
Bias or Lack of Reporting?
Compared to national media
sources, this story has been greatly covered in
Philadelphia, which is home to Gosnell's clinic. Most stories do break on a local level. For example, if a crime
was committed in Athens, Ohio, it does not automatically gain the attention of USA Today or The Washington Post. Stories must establish themselves within their
community before receiving national attention.
However, it was not as if news
companies were not aware of the initial story. Gosnell’s arrest was covered
when the story broke but few stations continued its coverage. Millions of
crimes happen everyday, so how can a news station cover all of them equally?
This is the only defense that is plausible for the lack of coverage. They simply
cannot abandon a story’s coverage just because another one comes along. Jodi
Arias’s trial occurred during the same time period. This crime was far more “glamorous” than the murders
Gosnell committed.
There may have been a lack of
reporting because they did not have as much material to share
with the public compared to the Arias case. For instance, it is extremely unethical to
present the public with graphic pictures of mutilated babies, as opposed to a
bloody sink in the Arias home.
Despite all the reasons that could
be used to explain why there was a lack of coverage on the case, it should have
been emphasized way more than it has been. This is a human rights issue, not one of
abortion. The media and the people must put differences aside and report on
such a horrific crime.
No comments:
Post a Comment