Reporting Life

During the March for Life, I predicted that the Washington Post would run its typical page A8 picture of two people arguing on the Supreme Court steps while the Washington Times would have an A2 picture of the large marching throng. Based on past history, I expected the more liberal Post to downplay the event and equate a few dozen pro-choicers with thousands of lifers.

I can happily report that my expectations have been exceeded. The Post provides a fair report that highlights the links between the unborn and other historic struggles, providing an evocative headline “Abortion Foes Recall Lincoln’s Slavery Stand: Crowd Asks Obama to Honor ‘Humanity.’”

The upbeat tone and youth of the crowd is noted and there is no two people screaming photo. The article is not perfect: the marchers (despite speakers and signs that highlighted euthanasia, cloning, Darfur, and the environment) are described only as “anti-abortion” while the rightly identified “few” “abortion-rights supporters” received the final word.

Surprisingly, the conservative-leaning Washington Times relegates its more expansive coverage to the Metro section. Importantly, though, the paper includes a front page photo entitled “Pro-Lifers Rise Up.” In a strange bedfellows situation, however, the A18 story is surrounded by coverage of a “death bill” seeking to expand executions in Virginia.

Solid coverage from the Times is no surprise. Fairer treatment from the Post is a welcome change. Sadly, the nation’s most politically influential paper, the New York Times, completely ignores the story. The dollar-con focused Wall Street Journal features an “argument” photo in an Obama to lift the gag rule piece that makes no mention of the thousands on the Mall.

In fair weather and foul; whether accurately covered or ignored; those who love life will continue to show up.

.