One of the main forces driving the decline of society is the Mainstream Media and the role that it plays in the everyday lives of citizens all around the world. The fine line between opinionated reporting and factual dispatches was swiftly and silently erased many years back. What we now have as our news sources favor a sensationalist style of media intended to captivate the minds and hearts of viewers, listeners, and readers, and to subliminally sway them towards the opinion of the news agency. Of course, to justify their actions in both the eyes of the audience and their own eyes, they will play it off as the “morally right” or “politically correct” opinion. This can be done by shifting the tone of the story, highlighting certain aspects of a case (instead of objectively covering the entire report), or even blatantly covering up or ignoring an item of news. Now the American media and its boss, the White House, which effectively controls and manipulates the stories related to us by the media , can efficiently attempt to change the public’s opinion regarding almost any topic.
An example of this control is the criminal case of a Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia, PA. Gosnell, 72, has been charged with eight counts of first-degree murder due to his involvement in his own abortion clinic, the Women’s Medical Society. “What’s wrong with that?” many “pro-choice” citizens would ask, “He, and the mothers who attended the clinic, were just exercising their legal right to an abortion!” It’s not so simple though. The problem stems from what he really did behind the scenes, which is far more grotesque than what an abortion already is. Here is the opening paragraph from the Report of the Grand Jury:
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. 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. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.
Here is the section of the report discussing the condition of his facility:
The clinic reeked of animal urine, courtesy of the cats that were allowed to roam (and defecate) freely. Furniture and blankets were stained with blood. Instruments were not properly sterilized. Disposable medical supplies were not disposed of; they were reused, over and over again. Medical equipment – such as the defibrillator, the EKG, the pulse oximeter, the blood pressure cuff – was generally broken; even when it worked, it wasn’t used. The emergency exit was padlocked shut. And scattered throughout, in cabinets, in the basement, in a freezer, in jars and bags and plastic jugs, were fetal remains. It was a baby charnel house.
Not only did he murder newborns in inhumane ways, but, as the report puts it, he was a “filthy fraud” who “overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease…” and in at least two occasions, caused the mothers to die as well. Now, why aren’t large media outlets like CNN covering this? It’s a sensational case due to its horrific nature, and would be able to reel in millions of viewers, which would bring along advertisers’ dollars. Shouldn’t CNN be vying for the “best coverage” and more air time of this case with other greedy news outlets like Fox News and MSNBC? It would be a fantastic opportunity for them to attempt to put their own spin on things. Though, as Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post put it:
The only logical conclusion for the absence of coverage is the obvious one: the mainstream media’s overwhelming bias in favor of the pro-choice position. The Gosnell story is the pro-choice movement’s worst nightmare.
Here is another quote from Rubin’s opinion piece:
One can suspect this story-selection bias is intentional (delinquencies invariably run in one direction), or one can allow that the lack of geographic, political and social diversity in newsrooms causes the MSM to miss such stories again and again. Either way, the mainstream media swim in a stream of bias, bumping along until their course is altered by outside forces. But the mainstream media can no longer get away with the hide-the-story game for very long. Too many alternative outlets are nipping at the MSM’s heels and carrying news the mainstream media won’t. The mainstream media have, meanwhile, turned off large sections of readers and viewers because they think most of the MSM is in the tank for liberals.
Now, what I’m criticizing here is not the biased “left-wing media” trying to cover up a story that could shake up the debate over abortion. While I am strictly pro-life and believe a case of this nature could change some people’s perspectives on the issue, my main criticism is aimed towards all of the major media stations: Why are you picking and choosing what you should air? Last time I checked, news is not meant to be subjective. It is supposed to present people with facts on matters of importance in order to allow them to formulate their own opinions on the subject. CNN, are you really telling us that stories on “‘90210’s’ Ian Ziering ‘excited’ to join Chippendales”  or “5 reasons you want Google Fiber in your city”  are more important than a fraudulent doctor that killed babies and women, sold illegal prescription drugs, and spread disease? You, as well as all of the other mainstream news outlets, should at least post a little blurb alerting the viewers of the heinous actions committed by this man.
Even though the case is beginning to pick up some coverage in mainstream news sources, it should have been fully covered from day one, which was when the trial began on March 18th. It didn’t take news sources almost a month to cover the Trayvon Martin case, or the Drew Peterson case. Why wait with another high profile case?
While I am ashamed at the bias occupying the established media stations, I still cannot decide who is more at fault: the media, for committing these acts of manipulation, or the people, willingly obeying and believing anything that sprouts from their television and computer screens into their retinas.