Media Bias Rears its Ugly Head

Once again, as if by magic, the liberal media has decided that instead of reporting events, they are going to politicize and spin them to their own agenda.

Back on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, as happens EVERY SINGLE YEAR (in the bitter cold of January) since its passage, the pro life community held a gigantic protest in Washington DC. This year, there were more than 300,000 people in attendance. There were also pro choice protesters there, but most reports say it was less than 100 people.

Well, guess what was in New York newspapers?

An archive photo of PRO CHOICE protesters… Read this: “In an article dated January 23, Gannett’s Democrat and Chronicle ran a report on a pro-life advocates attending the March for Life rally with the headline, “Rally Supports Roe v. Wade.” In addition to the slanted headline, the newspaper report began with a focus on pro-abortion demonstrators, who were far outnumbered by the pro-life supporters taking part in the March for Life. The article made mention of less than a dozen people who lined a Rochester street, holding signs supporting abortion.”

And the Washington Post, another biased rag not suitable for use as toilet paper did the same thing – a photo of 5 feminists holding pro-choice signs and an article that only mentions “thousands of abortion opponents” instead of using the actual numbers estimated by the police department.

This rally has occurred every year for 34 years, and I’ll bet you’ve never heard of it before you read my post here.

The media does more than slant stories, they show their bias by what they choose to report and what they choose not to report. My hope is that you’ll all remember that there’s never a single source of news that tells the entire story – they all have their agendas. Make sure you read widely and draw your own conclusions.

Even if you’re a liberal (Andria), you should read Drudge and O’Reilly as counterbalance to what MSNBC and ABC report. You can believe I read the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and even watch MSNBC. My primary source of news is CNN, not Fox as some of you might have thought. However, I always cross check my facts and make sure I have as much of a complete picture as possible.

It’s really stunning how overt the media bias is against conservative Christians in America.

Here’s a good article that goes into more detail about this specific event: Newsbusters Reports on March for Life Media Bias.

  4 comments for “Media Bias Rears its Ugly Head

  1. livieloo
    April 27, 2009 at 3:40 pm

    That makes me so mad. Thanks for the truth Incredipete.

  2. April 27, 2009 at 4:22 pm


    I agree with your sentiments about bias in the news. I don’t believe it’s widely known that 90% of our news is controlled by 6 media conglomerates: General Electric, Walt Disney, News Corp., TimeWarner, Viacom, and CBS. Below is a link I believe sheds the necessary light on what’s being discussed here. I hope you find it useful too.

    As for myself, I read the NYT and WSJ every day. Both are intelligent publications BUT they do have their bias and it’s painfully obvious which ways they lean towards. I suppose the truth is always somewhere in between. I also recommend BBC News for an equally intelligent but much less biased news source.

  3. April 27, 2009 at 5:19 pm

    Hahaha. Thanks for the shout out, Incredipete.

    I don’t watch a lot of news on television. I will admit that I watch Rachel Maddow pretty regularly, and sometimes Olbermann, but he’s a little blow-hard-y for me. And, well, I can’t stand anyone on Fox News Channel. I’ve tried, but I can’t do it. But I read a lot of news blogs – some (not a lot, I’ll admit) conservative, and some liberal.

  4. HRT
    April 29, 2009 at 9:38 am

    Just for the record, and I may be splitting hairs here. But it’s exactly because of the media bias that the Police no longer give “official” estimates of crowd sizes in D.C. In fact I “think” that Farrakhan sued the Park Service for “under-estimating” the size of the crowd at his Million-man-(marketing)march back in 1995.

Comments are closed.