Journalism is criticized for its pro-abortion advocacy, and it should be as it means a mother killing their child.
Many left-leaning people have become unhinged after the Supreme Court leaked a draft opinion about a ruling that could impact the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision. The leak also revealed that the media is overwhelmingly populated with liberal partisans. Numerous members of the media have broadcast unbalanced reactions to the document leak, exposing their undiluted political stance.
Many journalists are fine with supporting the potential damage that this position could cause to the highest court, as I mentioned in my latest Lie Able Sources podcast. This is despite the fact that they just days ago were telling us about Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter. While they were blaming social media websites for threatening the foundations of our nation’s existence, they now cheerleaders that one branch of that government is being attacked.
The Denver Post is a further departure from journalistic ethics. The Denver Post’s column by Conrad Swanson is rushed and focuses on pro-abortion activism. Swanson doesn’t pretend to be an expert on the topic, but instead advocates for the procedure and offers guidance about how to keep abortion access open.
This paper demonstrates its position in a glowing manner it describes how Roe v. Wade will not be repealed. Colorado will continue to allow abortion. “Lawmakers enshrined this right in state law last month.” The Denver Post doesn’t just express disappointment at the possible ruling from SCOTUS. It also sees it as a national negative. The full article explains the ramifications and what you can do about them.
Bolanos Perea stated that because Colorado has abortion rights, providers will be more stretched by the influx of patients from outside of Colorado. During the pandemic, medical providers had already been working to accommodate an increase in patients from out-of-state.
Although this sounds negative, Conrad is doing something extraordinary as a journalist. He wants to make it even more difficult for abortion providers by providing a tutorial about how women from other states can travel to Colorado to undergo the procedure. The public relations campaign that would make Planned Parenthood blush is an example of the abdication of journalistic standards.
There are quotes throughout the piece from only one side of this issue. A pro-abortion activist and a PPFA director are given a platform to provide all the necessary guidance for getting an abortion in Colorado. This is not an attempt to critically examine the issue, and there is no one who speaks for the other side. It’s pure positive promotion.
The abortion agitprop ends with a guidebook. Swanson suggests some sites that women from outside Colorado could use to obtain financial assistance to pay for an in-state procedure. Next, a link is provided to Act Blue, the fundraising portal run by the Democratic Party.
This is a major paper going into complete pro-abort advocacy mode.
They even provide a link for abortion funding through the Democrats. Absolute abandonment of objectivity and journalism. https://t.co/3ovKvqNjo1 pic.twitter.com/nI5KEY011s
— Brad Slager 🍸🥃🍺🎙 Lifetime Subscriber to CNN+ (@MartiniShark) May 4, 2022
If there’s any doubt about the Denver Post’s outward promotion of abortions, it guides women away from the possibility that an alternative is offered. The link to the “legitimate clinics” that offer the desired procedure is provided. This term is used to steer women away from centers that might offer alternatives or provide guidance. The paper admits that this is done to “eliminate ‘crisis pregnant centers’ which try to convince women not to have abortions.”
This article’s brazenness is remarkable. The Denver Post editorial decided to be a pro-abort advocacy organization. They even wave warning flags away from any sources that could influence women to get the procedure. This is an extreme editorial position, and it shows exactly what lies ahead of us with media in the next months.
As this issue progresses, we will be awash with this kind of partisan “journalism”.