You almost get the impression the Times doesn't want to be there. More than almost: The paper's editors make it explicit with their headline: "Online Furor Draws Press to Abortion Doctor's Trial." What an amazing headline that is. The editors of the New York Times declare that they're covering the trial under protest, yielding their news judgment to an angry online mob. It's probably the most honest thing they've ever published.
If you don’t know who Kermit Gosnell is, that’s because you read the New York Times and Politico.com, and you watch network news. Gosnell is a Philadelphia abortionist who’s currently on trial for murder. Multiple counts.
Megan McArdle of the Daily Beast acknowledged she “should have” written about the “horror Doc’s” clinic. The Washington Post made the stunning admission that “we should have sent a reporter sooner.” Dylan Beers, Politico’s media reporter, flatly stated that “Gosnell should be front-page, top-of-the-hour news by prime time tonight.” Jeffrey Goldberg, a Bloomberg View columnist, concluded, “It’s remarkable that it took this long.” Indeed, the silence had been stunning since the Gosnell trial began back on March 18. No mention of the story at all on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, or MSNBC, and no front-page stories in any major paper.
Hypocrisy, Liberal, Incitement, Character, Press, Abortion
Detroit Free Press: “the reason I haven’t written about Mr. Gosnell is the same reason Philadelphia journalists don’t write about homicide trials in Detroit”...
On Apr 10, 2013, at 12:58 PM, xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Waiting to read your column on Kermit Gosnell. I am sure your insight would be valued. Calling out hypocrites. Respectfully, xxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Leonard Pitts Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 2:07 PM To: xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Waiting …. Who? I’ve never heard of him. LP