Gosnell links 4/16/13

At the Washington Post, Sarah Kliff offers a mea culpa on her description of the Gosnell trail as a "local crime story" and outlines the basics.


New York Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan tries to explain the Gosnell coverage in the New York Times. 

I do think that it wasn't on their radar screen – and that it should have been. The murders of seven newborn babies, done so horrifically, would be no ordinary crime. Any suggestion, including mine on Friday, that this is just another murder trial is a miscalculation. And it's certainly possible that journalists who were more in touch with conservative voices and causes would have picked up on the importance of this trial sooner.                   

The New York Times has sent reporter Trip Gabriel there and he has an article which notes the role social media played in getting the national media to cover the trial.


Here's the Washington Post's article with a quote from National Right to Life's Mary Spaulding Balch.

"The significance of the trial is that it shows just how reluctant people are to look at what goes on in abortion facilities," said Mary Spaulding Balch, director for state legislation for National Right to Life, a group that opposes abortion. "This is something they don't know about, and they would be shocked to hear about it."

       
Tim Carney echoes those thoughts.
   

When you discuss the act of aborting -- even perfectly legal abortions -- you have to discuss the blood, the scalpels, the scissors. You might use terms like "dilation and extraction" or "dilation and curettage." Think through those terms ("curettage" is defined as "a surgical scraping or cleaning") and recall that what is being extracted or scraped has a beating heart.

Discussing Gosnell threatens to start a discussion on abortion procedures -- and that's not good for anyone in the abortion industry.

Same with Jonah Goldberg:

Regardless, Gosnell isn't only being charged with performing illegal late-term abortions. He's being charged with delivering viable babies and killing them. The really profound question here is what is the moral difference between killing a living baby that is outside the mother for a few seconds and killing one that's still inside. It's no wonder the media would rather talk about itself.