News outlets reject pro-life ad for being “too controversial”

[Stephanie]

show your support people...DON'T BUY these papers..they are pathetic
links in article at site

SNIP:

posted at 2:31 pm on July 6, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

What’s so controversial about a baby? When Heroic Media wanted to place an ad in major newspapers like USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, and Chicago Tribune to argue for a ban on late-term abortions, they didn’t include any graphic photos of aborted babies, or what abortion mills like Planned Parenthood call “products of conception” or “POCs.” Instead, it just shows a child at roughly 20 weeks gestation resting in the hand of an adult, which gives readers some badly-needed context about late-term abortions.



No problem, right? After all, our media has no trouble selling ad space for lots of pictures of babies, asleep and awake, for products from diapers to car tires to on-line investment firms. Suddenly, though, a baby to sell the concept of protecting human life is too controversial, according to these newspapers (via Carol Platt Liebau):


A national pro-life organization is outraged after three major American newspapers rejected a pro-life ad as “too controversial.”

The Chicago Tribune, USA Today, and the LA Times refused to run an advertisement created by Heroic Media. …

Heroic Media Executive Director Joe Young said he was shocked and angered that the media outlets were willing to talk about the issue but were unwilling to show the reality of life at 20 weeks.

“I am disturbed that these papers would run article after article promoting the notion that abortion is a victimless act without consequences,” Young said. “The fact remains, children who are unique individuals – never again to be duplicated – are being killed in the most violent way imaginable and they feel the excruciating pain of that death.”

The newspapers took issue with the image of the baby.

“It seems as though it is okay to talk about the issue in general, but when you actually put a face to the discussion, then it becomes controversial,” Young said.

No one here will argue that these outlets have a requirement to carry these ads. Their newspapers are their own property, and they should be allowed to choose freely on which advertisements they run. But we are also free to reach conclusions about their political bias based on those decisions, and it’s clear that these outlets don’t want a real debate on abortion, especially late-term abortion, based on facts. The argument that this photograph is somehow so controversial that it can’t be published in decent society is ridiculous immediately on viewing the ad. They’re not refusing it because it’s controversial — they’re refusing it because it’s effective.

Meanwhile, Scott Walker signed a bill in Wisconsin that duplicates the bill in Texas. You know, the one that’s so controversial that 62% of Texas voters support it:


all of it here
News outlets reject pro-life ad for being ?too controversial? « Hot Air

 

[novasteve]

Clump of cells! I should be allowed to do whatever I want unless it involves 100 watt bulbs, working toilets, setting my thermostat!

 

[R.C. Christian]

You people are wasting your time making moral arguments to subhuman leftist filth.

 

[Stephanie]

You people are wasting your time making moral arguments to subhuman leftist filth.

probably right... but it's always worth a shot it might appeal to one person...that's a start

 

[R.C. Christian]

You people are wasting your time making moral arguments to subhuman leftist filth.

probably right... but it's always worth a shot it might appeal to one person...that's a start

I admire your positive attitude.

 

[jknowgood]

There is nothing about that ad exect it shows baby killers that the truth hurts.

 

[Osomir]

You people are wasting your time making moral arguments to subhuman leftist filth.

Pretty appropriate AV you have there.

 

[Osomir]

I don't see the problem here. The topic of abortion is a pretty highly politically charged one here in the US and if the editors feel that it might alienate part of their potential reader based to have the ad included then it is a smart business move on their part to decide not to run it.

 

[National Socialist]

I don't buy any of those papers. I only buy the Asheville newspaper and my local newspaper.

 

[laughinReaper]

Awww did their microscopic little feelings get hurt the truth of the abortion abomination plagueing mankind brought on by their liberal lies? Can't face what they support? Bunch of pussies.