Why Dr. Kermit Gosnell's Trial Should Be a Major News Story

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,639
27,842
898
Seattle
#1
This is half news story, half opinion piece. Interesting and horrifying.

Multiple parts.

Why Dr. Kermit Gosnell's Trial Should Be a Major News Story
By Conor Friedersdorf, The Atlantic | National Journal – 11 hrs ago

The grand jury report in the case of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 72, is among the most horrifying I've read. "This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable babies in the third trimester of pregnancy - and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors," it states. "The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels - and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths."

Charged with seven counts of first-degree murder, Dr. Gosnell is now standing trial in a Philadelphia courtroom. An NBC affiliate's coverage includes testimony as grisly as you'd expect. "An unlicensed medical school graduate delivered graphic testimony about the chaos at a Philadelphia clinic where he helped perform late-term abortions," the channel reports. "Stephen Massof described how he snipped the spinal cords of babies, calling it, 'literally a beheading. It is separating the brain from the body.' He testified that at times, when women were given medicine to speed up their deliveries, 'it would rain fetuses. Fetuses and blood all over the place.'"

One former employee described hearing a baby screaming after it was delivered during an abortion procedure. "I can't describe it. It sounded like a little alien," she testified. Said the Philadelphia Inquirer in its coverage, "Prosecutors have cited the dozens of jars of severed baby feet as an example of Gosnell's idiosyncratic and illegal practice of providing abortions for cash to poor women pregnant longer than the 24-week cutoff for legal abortions in Pennsylvania."

Until Thursday, I wasn't aware of this story. It has generated sparse coverage in the national media, and while it's been mentioned in RSS feeds to which I subscribe, I skip past most news items. I still consume a tremendous amount of journalism. Yet had I been asked at a trivia night about the identity of Kermit Gosnell, I would've been stumped and helplessly guessed a green Muppet. Then I saw Kirsten Power's USA Todaycolumn. She makes a powerful, persuasive case that the Gosnell trial ought to be getting a lot more attention in the national press than it is getting.

The media criticism angle interests me. But I agree that the story has been undercovered, and I happen to be a working journalist, so I'll begin by telling the rest of the story for its own sake. Only then will I explain why I think it deserves more coverage than it has gotten, although it ought to be self-evident by the time I'm done distilling the grand jury's allegations. Grand juries aren't infallible. This version of events hasn't been proven in a court of law. But journalists routinely treat accounts given by police, prosecutors and grand juries as at least plausible if not proven. Try to decide, as you hear the state's side of the case, whether you think it is credible, and if so, whether the possibility that some or all this happened demands massive journalistic scrutiny.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,639
27,842
898
Seattle
#2
* * *

On February 18, 2010, the FBI raided the "Women's Medical Society," entering its offices about 8:30 p.m. Agents expected to find evidence that it was illegally selling prescription drugs. On entering, they quickly realized something else was amiss. In the grand jury report's telling, "There was blood on the floor. A stench of urine filled the air. A flea-infested cat was wandering through the facility, and there were cat feces on the stairs. Semi-conscious women scheduled for abortions were moaning in the waiting room or the recovery room, where they sat on dirty recliners covered with blood-stained blankets. All the women had been sedated by unlicensed staff." Authorities had also learned about the patient that died at the facility several months prior.

Public health officials inspected the surgery rooms. "Instruments were not sterile," the grand jury states. "Equipment was rusty and outdated. Oxygen equipment was covered with dust, and had not been inspected. The same corroded suction tubing used for abortions was the only tubing available for oral airways if assistance for breathing was needed. There was no functioning resuscitation or even monitoring equipment, except for a single blood pressure cuff." Upon further inspection, "the search team discovered fetal remains haphazardly stored throughout the clinic - in bags, milk jugs, orange juice cartons, and even in cat-food containers."

And "Gosnell admitted to Detective Wood that at least 10 to 20 percent of the fetuses were probably older than 24 weeks in gestation - even though Pennsylvania law prohibits abortions after 24 weeks. In some instances, surgical incisions had been made at the base of the fetal skulls." Gosnell's medical license was quickly suspended. 18 days later, The Department of Health filed papers to start the process of closing the clinic. The district attorney submitted the case to the grand jury on May 4, 2010. Testimony was taken from 58 witnesses. Evidence was examined.

In Pennsylvania, most doctors won't perform abortions after the 20th week, many for health reasons, others for moral reasons. Abortions after 24 weeks are illegal. Until 2009, Gosnell reportedly performed mostly first and second trimester abortions. But his clinic had come to develop a bad reputation, and could attract only women who couldn't get an abortion elsewhere, former employees have said. "Steven Massof estimated that in 40 percent of the second-trimester abortions performed by Gosnell, the fetuses were beyond 24 weeks gestational age," the grand jury states. "Latosha Lewis testified that Gosnell performed procedures over 24 weeks 'too much to count,' and ones up to 26 weeks 'very often.' ...in the last few years, she testified, Gosnell increasingly saw out-of-state referrals, which were all second-trimester, or beyond. By these estimates, Gosnell performed at least four or five illegal abortions every week."

The grand jury report includes an image of a particularly extreme case (the caption is theirs, not mine):

That photo pertains to an unusual case, in that the mother had to seek help at a hospital after the abortion she sought at Gosnell's office went awry. The grand jury report summarizes a more typical late-term abortion, as conducted at the clinic, concluding with the following passage:

When you perform late-term "abortions" by inducing labor, you get babies. Live, breathing, squirming babies. By 24 weeks, most babies born prematurely will survive if they receive appropriate medical care. But that was not what the Women's Medical Society was about. Gosnell had a simple solution for the unwanted babies he delivered: he killed them. He didn't call it that. He called it "ensuring fetal demise." The way he ensured fetal demise was by sticking scissors into the back of the baby's neck and cutting the spinal cord. He called that "snipping."

Over the years, there were hundreds of "snippings." Sometimes, if Gosnell was unavailable, the "snipping" was done by one of his fake doctors, or even by one of the administrative staff.

But all the employees of the Women's Medical Society knew. Everyone there acted as if it wasn't murder at all. Most of these acts cannot be prosecuted, because Gosnell destroyed the files. Among the relatively few cases that could be specifically documented, one was Baby Boy A. His 17-year-old mother was almost 30 weeks pregnant - seven and a half months - when labor was induced. An employee estimated his birth weight as approaching six pounds. He was breathing and moving when Dr. Gosnell severed his spine and put the body in a plastic shoebox for disposal. The doctor joked that this baby was so big he could "walk me to the bus stop." Another, Baby Boy B, whose body was found at the clinic frozen in a one-gallon spring-water bottle, was at least 28 weeks of gestational age when he was killed. Baby C was moving and breathing for 20 minutes before an assistant came in and cut the spinal cord, just the way she had seen Gosnell do it so many times. And these were not even the worst cases.

Abuse of Women Patients

What little media coverage there's been in the case has understandably focused on the murder allegations. The grand jury report also makes clear how horrific Women's Medical Society was for the patients.

The unsanitary conditions were just the beginning.

One woman "was left lying in place for hours after Gosnell tore her cervix and colon while trying, unsuccessfully, to extract the fetus," the report states. Another patient, 19, "was held for several hours after Gosnell punctured her uterus. As a result of the delay, she fell into shock from blood loss, and had to undergo a hysterectomy." A third patient "went into convulsions during an abortion, fell off the procedure table, and hit her head on the floor. Gosnell wouldn't call an ambulance, and wouldn't let the woman's companion leave the building so that he could call an ambulance."

Often times, women given drugs to induce labor delivered before the doctor even arrived at work.

Said one former employee:

If... a baby was about to come out, I would take the woman to the bathroom, they would sit on the toilet and basically the baby would fall out and it would be in the toilet and I would be rubbing her back and trying to calm her down for two, three, four hours until Dr. Gosnell comes.

She would not move.

One patient died:

She was a 41-year-old, refugee who had recently come to the United States from a resettlement camp in Nepal. When she arrived at the clinic, Gosnell, as usual, was not there. Office workers had her sign various forms that she could not read, and then began doping her up. She received repeated unmonitored, unrecorded intravenous injections of Demerol, a sedative seldom used in recent years because of its dangers. Gosnell liked it because it was cheap. After several hours, Mrs. Mongar simply stopped breathing. When employees finally noticed, Gosnell was called in and briefl y attempted to give CPR. He couldn't use the defibrillator (it was broken); nor did he administer emergency medications that might have restarted her heart. After further crucial delay, paramedics finally arrived, but Mrs.Mongar was probably brain dead before they were even called. In the meantime, the clinic staff hooked up machinery and rearranged her body to make it look like they had been in the midst of a routine, safe abortion procedure.

Even then, there might have been some slim hope of reviving Mrs. Mongar. The paramedics were able to generate a weak pulse. But, because of the cluttered hallways and the padlocked emergency door, it took them over twenty minutes just to find a way to get her out of the building. Doctors at the hospital managed to keep her heart beating, but they never knew what they were trying to treat, because Gosnell and his staff lied about how much anesthesia they had given, and who had given it. By that point, there was no way to restore any neurological activity. Life support was removed the next day. Karnamaya Mongar was pronounced dead.

Another provocative detail: A former employee testified "that white patients often did not have to wait in the same dirty rooms as black and Asian clients. Instead, Gosnell would escort them up the back steps to the only clean office - Dr. O'Neill's - and he would turn on the TV for them. Mrs. Mongar, she said, would have been treated 'no different from the rest of the Africans and Asians.'"

Said the employee:

Like if a girl - the black population was - African population was big here. So he didn't mind you medicating your African American girls, your Indian girl, but if you had a white girl from the suburbs, oh, you better not medicate her. You better wait until he go in and talk to her first. And one day I said something to him and he was like, that's the way of the world. Huh?

And he brushed it off and that was it.

Anesthesia was frequently dispensed by employees who were neither legally permitted nor trained to do it, including a 15-year-old high school student who worked at the clinic, the report states.

Most employees did as they were told, but one objected:

Marcella Stanley Choung, who told us that her "training" for anesthesia consisted of a 15-minute description by Gosnell and reading a chart he had posted in a cabinet. She was so uncomfortable medicating patients, she said, that she "didn't sleep at night." She knew that if she made even a small error, "I can kill this lady, and I'm not jail material." One night in 2002, when she found herself alone with 15 patients, she refused Gosnell's directives to medicate them. She made an excuse, went to her car, and drove away, never to return. Choung immediately filed a complaint with the Department of State, but the department never acted on it.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-dr-kermit-gosnells-trial-major-news-story-104719415--politics.html
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,639
27,842
898
Seattle
#3
The Failure to Stop It

That brings us to a subject you've perhaps been wondering about: How on earth did this go on for so long without anyone stopping it? The grand jury delved into that very question in their report. I'm going to excerpt it at length, because it bears directly on the question that will concern us afterward: has this story gotten an appropriate amount of attention from the news media?


Here is the grand jury on oversight failures:

Pennsylvania is not a third-world country. There were several oversight agencies that stumbled upon and should have shut down Kermit Gosnell long ago. But none of them did...

The first line of defense was the Pennsylvania Department of Health. The department's job is to audit hospitals and outpatient medical facilities, like Gosnell's, to make sure that they follow the rules and provide safe care. The department had contact with the Women's Medical Society dating back to 1979, when it first issued approval to open an abortion clinic. It did not conduct another site review until 1989, ten years later. Numerous violations were already apparent, but Gosnell got a pass when he promised to fix them. Site reviews in 1992 and 1993 also noted various violations, but again failed to ensure they were corrected.


But at least the department had been doing something up to that point, however ineffectual. After 1993, even that pro form a effort came to an end. Not because of administrative ennui, although there had been plenty. Instead, the Pennsylvania Department of Health abruptly decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all... The only exception to this live-and-let-die policy was supposed to be for complaints dumped directly on the department's doorstep. Those, at least, would be investigated. Except that there were complaints about Gosnell, repeatedly. Several different attorneys, representing women injured by Gosnell, contacted the department. A doctor from Children's Hospital of Philadelphia hand-delivered a complaint, advising the department that numerous patients he had referred for abortions came back from Gosnell with the same venereal disease. The medical examiner of Delaware County informed the department that Gosnell had performed an illegal abortion on a 14-year-old girl carrying a 30-week-old baby. And the department received official notice that a woman named Karnamaya Mongar had died at Gosnell's hands.

Yet not one of these alarm bells - not even Mrs. Mongar's death - prompted the department to look at Gosnell or the Women's Medical Society... But even this total abdication by the Department of Health might not have been fatal. Another agency with authority in the health field, the Pennsylvania Department of State, could have stopped Gosnell single-handedly.

The Department of State, through its Board of Medicine, licenses and oversees individual physicians... Almost a decade ago, a former employee of Gosnell presented the Board of Medicine with a complaint that laid out the whole scope of his operation: the unclean, unsterile conditions; the unlicensed workers; the unsupervised sedation; the underage abortion patients; even the over-prescribing of pain pills with high resale value on the street. The department assigned an investigator, whose investigation consisted primarily of an offsite interview with Gosnell. The investigator never inspected the facility, questioned other employees, or reviewed any records. Department attorneys chose to accept this incomplete investigation, and dismissed the complaint as unconfirmed.

Shortly thereafter the department received an even more disturbing report - about a woman, years before Karnamaya Mongar, who died of sepsis after Gosnell perforated her uterus. The woman was 22 years old. A civil suit against Gosnell was settled for almost a million dollars, and the insurance company forwarded the information to the department. That report should have been all the confirmation needed for the complaint from the former employee that was already in the department's possession. Instead, the department attorneys dismissed this complaint too... The same thing happened at least twice more: the department received complaints about lawsuits against Gosnell, but dismissed them as meaningless...
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,639
27,842
898
Seattle
#4
Philadelphia health department employees regularly visited the Women's Medical Society to retrieve blood samples for testing purposes, but never noticed, or more likely never bothered to report, that anything was amiss. Another employee inspected the clinic in response to a complaint that dead fetuses were being stored in paper bags in the employees' lunch refrigerator. The inspection confirmed numerous violations... But no follow-up was ever done... A health department representative also came to the clinic as part of a citywide vaccination program. She promptly discovered that Gosnell was scamming the program; she was the only employee, city or state, who actually tried to do something about the appalling things she saw there. By asking questions and poking around, she was able to file detailed reports identifying many of the most egregious elements of Gosnell's practice. It should have been enough to stop him. But instead her reports went into a black hole, weeks before Karnamaya Mongar walked into the Woman's Medical Society.

...And it wasn't just government agencies that did nothing. The Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and its subsidiary, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, are in the same neighborhood as Gosnell's office. State law requires hospitals to report complications from abortions. A decade ago, a Gosnell patient died at HUP after a botched abortion, and the hospital apparently filed the necessary report. But the victims kept coming in. At least three other Gosnell patients were brought to Penn facilities for emergency surgery; emergency room personnel said they have treated many others as well. And at least one additional woman was hospitalized there after Gosnell had begun a flagrantly illegal abortion of a 29-week-old fetus. Yet, other than the one initial report, Penn could find not a single case in which it complied with its legal duty to alert authorities to the danger. Not even when a second woman turned up virtually dead...
So too with the National Abortion Federation.

NAF is an association of abortion providers that upholds the strict est health and legal standards for its members. Gosnell, bizarrely, applied for admission shortly after Karnamaya Mongar's death. Despite his various efforts to fool her, the evaluator from NAF readily noted that records were not properly kept, that risks were not explained, that patients were not monitored, that equipment was not available, that anesthesia was misused. It was the worst abortion clinic she had ever inspected. Of course, she rejected Gosnell's application. She just never told anyone in authority about all the horrible, dangerous things she had seen.

The conclusion drawn at the end of the section is provocative. "Bureaucratic inertia is not exactly news. We understand that," it states. "But we think this was something more. We think the reason no one acted is because the women in question were poor and of color, because the victims were infants without identities, and because the subject was the political football of abortion."
A Front-Page Story

Says Kirsten Powers in her USA Today op-ed, "Let me state the obvious. This should be front page news. When Rush Limbaugh attacked Sandra Fluke, there was non-stop media hysteria. The venerable NBC Nightly News' Brian Williams intoned, 'A firestorm of outrage from women after a crude tirade from Rush Limbaugh,' as he teased a segment on the brouhaha. Yet, accusations of babies having their heads severed -- a major human rights story if there ever was one -- doesn't make the cut."

Inducing live births and subsequently severing the heads of the babies is indeed a horrific story that merits significant attention. Strange as it seems to say it, however, that understates the case.

For this isn't solely a story about babies having their heads severed, though it is that. It is also a story about a place where, according to the grand jury, women were sent to give birth into toilets; where a doctor casually spread gonorrhea and chlamydiae to unsuspecting women through the reuse of cheap, disposable instruments; an office where a 15-year-old administered anesthesia; an office where former workers admit to playing games when giving patients powerful narcotics; an office where white women were attended to by a doctor and black women were pawned off on clueless untrained staffers. Any single one of those things would itself make for a blockbuster news story. Is it even conceivable that an optometrist who attended to his white patients in a clean office while an intern took care of the black patients in a filthy room wouldn't make national headlines?

But it isn't even solely a story of a rogue clinic that's awful in all sorts of sensational ways either. Multiple local and state agencies are implicated in an oversight failure that is epic in proportions! If I were a city editor for any Philadelphia newspaper the grand jury report would suggest a dozen major investigative projects I could undertake if I had the staff to support them. And I probably wouldn't have the staff. But there is so much fodder for additional reporting.

There is, finally, the fact that abortion, one of the most hotly contested, polarizing debates in the country, is at the center of this case. It arguably informs the abortion debate in any number of ways, and has numerous plausible implications for abortion policy, including the oversight and regulation of clinics, the appropriateness of late-term abortions, the penalties for failing to report abuses, the statute of limitations for killings like those with which Gosnell is charged, whether staff should be legally culpable for the bad behavior of doctors under whom they work...

There's just no end to it.

To sum up, this story has numerous elements any one of which would normally make it a major story. And setting aside conventions, which are flawed, this ought to be a big story on the merits.

The news value is undeniable.

Why isn't it being covered more? I've got my theories. But rather than offer them at the end of an already lengthy item, I'd like to survey some of the editors and writers making coverage decisions.
I would have done this in one post and spoilered the rest, but the board software is a cunt.
 

ruckstande

Posts mostly from the shitter.
Apr 2, 2005
15,614
4,900
693
South Jersey
#5
So is anyone going to try to argue for him that delivering babies alive and killing them with scissors is okay.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,963
18,636
513
Kingdom of Charis
#6
Washington Post was basically shamed into covering it by their own people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs.../12/washington-post-pledges-gosnell-coverage/

We believe the story is deserving of coverage by our own staff, and we intend to send a reporter for the resumption of the trial next week. In retrospect, we should have sent a reporter sooner.
Gee, ya think?

Some of the tweets by lefty media people are just amazing. This isn't an abortion story. It's an infanticide story.
 

Myhairygrundle

Screw you guys, I'm going home.
Jul 16, 2005
6,798
1,947
608
Texas
#7
It's not being reported because the left is ok with this.

Obama voted for this sort of thing while in the state senate. I think it was called the Born Alive Protection Act or something like that.

The far left is ok with abortion at anytime for any reason.

What a piece of shit this doctor is.
 

Sinn Fein

Infidel and White Interloper
Wackbag Staff
Aug 29, 2002
31,860
2,378
898
Florida's Nature Coast
#8
The media sickens me even more than usual... Its beyond disgraceful that there is NO coverage of this by most major news outlets.
 

MrAbovePar

En Taro Anthony
Mar 14, 2005
13,782
3,176
678
Covington. La
#9
A Washington Post reporter IIRC tried to defend their lack of coverage by stating it was a local crime story and not something they typically cover. Unlike the Trayvon Martin shooting or a whole host of stories about local incidents.

Tom Ridge issued a statement yet? He's the guy who called off the inspections. Seems like he should explain his decision.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,327
13,009
438
Atlanta, GA
#11
'it would rain fetuses. Fetuses and blood all over the place.'
So the office had a festive vibe to it? Did the staff play Limbo with the spines?
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,963
18,636
513
Kingdom of Charis
#12
A Washington Post reporter IIRC tried to defend their lack of coverage by stating it was a local crime story and not something they typically cover. Unlike the Trayvon Martin shooting or a whole host of stories about local incidents.

Tom Ridge issued a statement yet? He's the guy who called off the inspections. Seems like he should explain his decision.
And there was also the Salon writer who said Bush was a worse mass murderer. I just don't understand the conduct here. Right wing media doesn't ignore church sex scandals and such, so why this? All politics aside, this guy is a monster. It's one of those rare times where we can all agree on something and it is still being shoehorned into some kind of divisive issue. Why? To what end? It's just depressing.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#13
There is no Gosnell coverup

The horrors and underlying disparities exploited by Kermit Gosnell aren't new -- nor have they been ignored(UPDATE)


This week, the right wing has been working the refs, demanding to know why the press has been allegedly silent on the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia doctor who allegedly committed horrific acts against his patients with impunity for years. Fox News’ Kristen Powers kicked it off with an Op-Ed in USA Today, claiming, “The deafening silence of too much of the media, once a force for justice in America, is a disgrace.” Michelle Malkin has helped spearhead a Twitter campaign. Breitbart.com calls it “a full-blown, coordinated blackout throughout the entire national media.”
And mostly, the campaign is working, generating a series of sheepish responses (and a near-instant BuzzFeed listicle). In an Atlantic piece headlined, “Why Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s trial should be a front page story,” Conor Friedersdorf admits, “Until Thursday, I wasn’t aware of this story … Had I been asked at a trivia night about the identity of Kermit Gosnell, I would’ve been stumped and helplessly guessed a green Muppet.” Slate’s Dave Weigel congratulated the tweeters for getting his attention and then filed a piece sympathetic to the coverup claim, lecturing pro-choice people that “You really should read that grand jury report,” and concluding, “Social conservatives are largely right about the Gosnell story.”
No, they aren’t right about the Gosnell story. If you’ve never heard of the Gosnell story, it’s not because of a coverup by the liberal mainstream media. It’s probably because you failed to pay attention to the copious coverage among pro-choice and feminist journalists, as well as the big news organizations, when the news first broke in 2011. There would be something rich, if it weren’t so infuriating, about these (almost uniformly male, as it happens) reporters and commentators scrambling to break open this shocking untold story. You know, the one that was written about here, here and here, to name some disparate sources.
I can’t speak for big news organizations like CNN and the networks, but let’s think about this question another way: How often do such places devote their energies to covering the massive health disparities and poor outcomes that are wrought by our current system? How often are the travails of the women whose vulnerabilities Gosnell exploited — the poor, immigrants and otherwise marginalized people — given wall-to-wall, trial-level coverage? If you’re surprised that in the face of politicized stigma, lack of public funding or good information, and a morass of restrictive laws allegedly meant to protect women, the vacuum was filled by a monster — well, the most generous thing I can say is that you haven’t been paying attention.
But since you’re here, guys — welcome. Here are some important things to know about the tragedies committed in Gosnell’s clinic, based on the sources you missed. This week, as Virginia-based pro-choice activist Michelle Kinsey Bruns noted on Twitter, “Fitting that the right is trying to whip folks into a frenzy over #Gosnell the same day VA is trying to put safe abortion care out of reach.” She’s referring to so-called TRAP laws, which are regulations aimed at abortion clinics that have nothing to do with safety — say, the size of parking lots — to seek to drive them out of business, and which are expected to go forward in a vote today. According to Tara Murtha, a Philadelphia-based reporter who has been covering the Gosnell case from the start, in the aftermath of Pennsylvania’s own TRAP laws, the state went from 22 free-standing clinics to 13. As Murtha puts it, “The bottom line is that politicizing abortion led to Gosnell. Their answer? Politicize it more.”
After all, the question is not just why the state failed to respond to the complaints of women and advocates who visited the clinic, although that matters hugely. It’s why women kept going there anyway: because they felt they had no alternative. Read this account from Jeff Deeney, a social worker from Philadelphia, who points out that the lack of public funding for abortion is a big factor leading desperate women to Gosnell: “It’s worth noting for outsiders that Health Center #4 which serves the same neighborhood is the best in town, providing quality care for the uninsured poor. But Health Centers don’t do abortions, and Medicaid, where a TANF mom’s insurance coverage would come from, if she had any at all, doesn’t pay for them. And for these women the cost of paying for an abortion out of pocket breaks the budget, leaving mom scrambling to make next month’s rent or possibly wind up on the street.” Cost is also how women often get past the legal gestational limit, as they struggle to save up enough money — and Gosnell’s willingness to break the law was what made him their last chance. To everyone who thinks his case was a reason for more abortion restrictions: What he did was already illegal.
A new abortion clinic opened up recently in Kansas, a rare event that itself directly pointed to why there are ever-fewer legitimate abortion providers. It’s housed in a clinic that once housed the practice of Dr. George Tiller, murdered by an antiabortion extremist. As RH Reality Checkreported, the clinic’s new providers are already being threatened, and in a jailhouse conversation with Tiller’s murderer, another extremist said of the opening, “It is a reckless act. It is not the act of someone who values their own safety. It is a gauntlet thrown down, by someone who wants a fight.” How much have you heard about that?
By all means, be up in arms about Kermit Gosnell. But blame existing policies and public indifference to low-income communities.
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/12/there_is_no_gosnell_coverup/
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#14
On Gosnell “blackout,” where were conservatives before this week?

While they blame the liberal media for ignoring the story, conservatives have mostly missed it themselves



Piggybacking on Irin Carmon’s excellent piece dismantling the myth that the media has intentionally ignored the case of Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia abortion doctor now on trail for allegedly committing horrific crimes against his patients, it’s worth noting that some conservatives attacking the media now didn’t seem particularly interested in the case until a few days ago.
As Dave Weigel points out in his response to Carmon, one reason Gosnell didn’t get more attention was because the judge issued a gag order preventing lawyers from speaking publicly about it, but another may be that pro-life politicians never nationalized Gosnell’s crimes and made them into an issue that would attract more discussion.
A search of the Congressional Record for the 112th Congress (2011-2012) turns up zero mentions for Gosnell, while a search of the current 113th Congress finds three — all from yesterday.
“I’m here today to talk about an uncomfortable subject which no one seems to want to talk about,” Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Scott Perry said on the floor yesterday. “The media doesn’t want to talk about it — not NBC, CBS, ABC, CNBC, not Fox, and not the leaders of our Nation, not the President.”
But where was Perry until Thursday? Or, for that matter, where were the other two lawmakers who spoke out yesterday, Texas Republican Roger Williams and New Jersey’s Chris Smith? Where was Rep. Trent Franks, perhaps the most outspoken Republican on abortion, or Virginia Foxx or even Louie Gohmert, who never misses an opportunity to speak on hot botton social issues?
What about the conservative media? A search of TVEyes finds that Fox News mentioned the case just a handful of times. Special Report With Bret Baier included brief updates on the trail in its roundup of the day’s news on several nights over the past month, while Mike Huckabee aired a taped segment followed by a panel discussion on his weekend show late last month, but it’s hardly been leading news. The “Obama phone” got far more coverage.
A search of the National Review’s website shows it’s written little on Gosnell, while the Weekly Standard has done three pieces (the magazine has run six stories on Justin Bieber). To its credit, Breitbart.com, which decried “a full-blown, coordinated blackout throughout the entire national media” has written plenty about Gosnell. But Twitchy, the Michelle Malkin-backed conservative Twitter-activism site that has been haranguing the media for not covering the case, didn’t offer itsfirst real mention until March 19.
And I couldn’t find anything from Fox contributor Kirsten Powers on Gosnell from before this week. She kicked off this whole conversation with a USA Today Op-Ed.
Regardless of whether the Gosnell case should be getting more attention, it’s difficult to take complaints seriously from people who haven’t used their own public platforms to push a story they think others are now ignoring.
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/12/conservatives_should_look_inward_on_gosnell_blackout/
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,963
18,636
513
Kingdom of Charis
#15
Big murder trial starts. The right covers it. The left doesn't. The right cries foul. The left says: "Where were you before March 19?" They are covering THE TRIAL, which started on March 18. Nice try, Mayr. Again. The Washington Post flat out admitted that they should have started reporting on it sooner.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#16
Big murder trial starts. The right covers it. The left doesn't. The right cries foul. The left says: "Where were you before March 19?" They are covering THE TRIAL, which started on March 18. Nice try, Mayr. Again. The Washington Post flat out admitted that they should have started reporting on it sooner.
CNN is "the right" now?

Not All Of Cable News Ignored Kermit Gosnell: CNN’s Jake Tapper First Covered ‘House Of Horrors’ On March 21

by Noah Rothman | 1:16 pm, April 12th, 2013
VIDEO
Much of the print and television media is taking it on the chin on Friday as an enraged blogosphere asks the press why they have been ignoring the outrageous story of a Philadelphia-area abortion provider who avoided inspection for years and engaged in the most horrific late-term abortion practices – including the mutilation of fetuses and preservation of dismembered appendages. But not every cable news media outlet was complicit in ignoring the story of alleged murdered Kermit Gosnell. On March 21, long before the story exploded on the internet, the tale of Gosnell’s “House of Horrors” was reported on CNN by The Lead host, Jake Tapper.

RELATED: Why Is Wikipedia Considering Deleting Article On Abortion ‘House Of Horrors’ Doctor Kermit Gosnell?
As part of a rapid-fire segment featuring a variety of national headlines segment on The Lead, Tapper delved into the horrific details emerging in the Gosnell case.
“One by one, witnesses are sharing horror stories in the trial of a Philadelphia abortion provider,” Tapper began. “The evidence in the case is so gruesome, some jurors have been seen covering their mouths.”
He noted that Gosnell is accused of murdering seven babies born alive and murdering one female adult during a botched abortion procedure.
Tapper, a Philadelphia-area native, may have come across the story while keeping tabs on the goings on in his home city.
Fox News Channel anchor Bret Baier also covered the story on March 21 during his 6 p.m. EST program Special Report. FNC updated their audience on the Gosnell story in follow up stories on March 23 – 26 and again on April 4.
On Friday afternoon, Tapper will invite a reporter with the Philadelphia Inquirer on CNN to go into detail about the ongoing Gosnell trial and the horrible details of the state’s case against him and his abortion practice.

Watch the clip below via CNN:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/not-all-...r-first-covered-house-of-horrors-on-march-21/
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#17
Here's How TV News Covered Gosnell Before The Trial Started

The media first covered the issue when Gosnell was arraigned in 2011.

CNN: 6 segments



CNN first covered the Gosnell on CNN Newsroom on January 19th and then followed up with coverage on January 20th, the 22nd, the 25th, February 9th and February 15th.
Source: media-alliance.org

Fox News: 3 segments



Fox News first covered Gosnell on January 20th on Special Report and then followed up with more coverage on January 21st. Bill O'Reilly covered it on January 27th.
Source: rawstory.com

MSNBC: 3 segments



MSNBC covered Gosnell first on Jansing and Company on January 20th, then again on January 21st on First Look and then again MSNBC News Live on January 23rd.
Source: liveactionnews.org

CBS: 2 segments



CBS covered the story on CBS Evening News on January 19th. They followed up the next morning on CBS Morning New.
Source: mediabistro.com

ABC: 1



ABC covered the Gosnell case on ABC World News on January 20th 2011.
Source: holdingouthelp.org

NBC News: 0



Source: 3.bp.blogspot.com

CORRECTION: MSNBC covered the Gosnell case three times. A previous version of this post misstated the number. (4/12/13)
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/heres-how-tv-news-covered-gosnell-before-the-trial-started
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,327
13,009
438
Atlanta, GA
#18
The cover-up allegations are fucking retarded. The doctor was unquestionably a monster, but I don't understand why that's news. I'm glad that there was at least one juicy, freak show murder that the media didn't turn into a huge fucking circus. No "Tot Doc" mentions on Nancy Grace's show, no trial by public opinion, nothing.

Of course, all of that might change now because some people just had to complain.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
Nov 1, 2004
13,381
6,613
701
#19
A Washington Post reporter IIRC tried to defend their lack of coverage by stating it was a local crime story and not something they typically cover. Unlike the Trayvon Martin shooting or a whole host of stories about local incidents.
I guess they must not have reported on Rodney King, O.J., Columbine, The tsunami, Aurora, Newtown, Stubenville.

Do these journalists even think before they post those type of transparent, asinine excuses?
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#20
I admit I'm not very familiar with the story, but from what I've read, this guy is the lowest of the low, but at the same time, he is the best argument available for safe and readily available abortions. If the right wingers get their way and outlaw abortion (or try to return the right to the states), the legal and regulated places will go away and hundreds of Kermit Gosnell style clinics will spring up in his place to take over the demand.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,963
18,636
513
Kingdom of Charis
#21
Better show that link to your friends at http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/04/12/erin-burnett-latest-in-media-to-push-claim-that/193618]Media Matters.[/url]

Big murder trial starts. The right covers it. The left doesn't. The right cries foul. The left says: "Where were you before March 19?" They are covering THE TRIAL, which started on March 18. Nice try, Mayr. Again. The Washington Post flat out admitted that they should have started reporting on it sooner.
Yeah, you sure countered my point there. Oh wait, you actually proved it.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,963
18,636
513
Kingdom of Charis
#22
The cover-up allegations are fucking retarded. The doctor was unquestionably a monster, but I don't understand why that's news. I'm glad that there was at least one juicy, freak show murder that the media didn't turn into a huge fucking circus. No "Tot Doc" mentions on Nancy Grace's show, no trial by public opinion, nothing.

Of course, all of that might change now because some people just had to complain.
To call it a coverup is fucking stupid. It is a bunch of reporters who didn't want to make a big deal out of it because they think it will be used by pro lifers to show that abortion is evil. Which it will be, but so what? They'll say that whether it's a front page story or not.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#23

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,963
18,636
513
Kingdom of Charis
#24
Fox and CNN covered it at the same time. How does that prove a huge liberal coverup of this story?
First of all, cut the loaded question crap. I never said a huge liberal coverup so just shut it.

Second, my initial and only point addressed coverage AFTER THE TRIAL BEGAN. I stated this quite clearly. You countered with a Buzzfeed article specifically comparing PRE TRIAL COVERAGE.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,922
8,997
763
Loveland, CO
#25
Big murder trial starts. The right covers it. The left doesn't
Your quote. My NEXT POST identified that CNN and FOX started covering the trial on the SAME DAY. Where is the left "not covering it" any more so than the Right isnt?