Thousands, maybe even ten thousand, pro-life proponents marched on January 15 through Chicago's downtown, but it received only token, if that, coverage by the Chicago media. Some media reported that "hundreds" marched, which is a vast inaccuracy or a deliberate lie for any reporter who was there. To get a feel for exactly the number of marchers, you need to go to Chris Iverson's Facebook page to see a video of the march. Or go here.
For those who don't do Facebook (I've asked Iverson to send me the embedded code so I can post it here), the camera is in a single, fixed location so that you can get a sense of how many people are marching past. The video goes on for more than five minutes before it ends, but there still are plenty of marchers yet to pass the camera.
Can the editors and reporters in Chicago's newsrooms not understand why so many Americans consider the media to be biased. Here is a wrap-up of the coverage of the march by the Chicago media. (My apologies for missing any coverage in my Google search)
A story about preparations for the pro-life ("anti-abortion") march was tucked away in the Chicago Tribune's "community contributor"section written by, not a regular staff writer, but Montini Catholic senior Jessica Browne as part of its suburban coverage. In contrast, the day following the march, when you'd expect to see coverage (I couldn't find any), there was a front page story, "Unity, equality, pink hats: Women's March on Chicago calls out to thousands." I see some irony in how the Tribune could use a front-page story about a march that is expected to draw thousands, while ignoring a march that actually drew thousands. Meanwhile, my search of the Tribune website showed four other stage-setter stories about the women's anti-Trump march in the Tribune or its affiliate suburban paper.
While thousands all across the Chicago area were preparing for pro-life march, Chicago Tonight (WTTW) reported that thousands are expected for--not the prolife march--but the Women’s March on Chicago this coming weekend, as did Chicagoist
Here's WGN's coverage that underplayed the number of marchers by calling them "hundreds."
Here's CBS-2 coverage, which included equal time for a couple hundred women showing up on Sunday to condemn Trump.
Having worked in Chicago newsrooms for decades, I think I understand the decision to not cover the march or only to give it token coverage: "They do it every year." Exactly. Thousands turn out every year to march in all kinds of weather. What motives them? How about some interviews to explore the issue? Why is it one of the most dogged civil rights movement in the past 40-some years? Why do the activists consider it to be a civil rights and human rights issue--more than a religious issue? Do editors even know that many pro-lifers consider it to be a civil rights/human rights issue? Interview some women who had decided to have an abortion, but changed their minds. Where they "coerced by pro-life "extremists"? There are some great personal stories in the crowd, but I guess we'll never hear them.
Here is a more comprehensive video provided by a pro-life group. How would you describe the number of participants and level of energy? Please note the number of young women who are totally involved.
An interesting aside: The question that pro-choice advocates don't want to answer (not from the Chicago march):
Okay, your turn. Begin the ad hominem attacks.
Find out what freelance editorial services I can provide for you.
Filed under: Uncategorized