New York Times Writer of 138 Stories on Abortion Admits Pro-Abortion Bias

LifeSiteNews ^ | 9/28/06 | Hilary White

[wagglebee]

NEW YORK, September 28, 2006 (LifeSIteNews.com) – The New York Times reputation for objectivity took another blow today as one of that paper’s reporters has ripped into those who would “threaten abortion rights.”

Linda Greenhouse, speaking at a Harvard University appearance this summer, complained of a “sustained assault on women’s reproductive freedom and the hijacking of public policy by religious fundamentalism. To say that these last few years have been dispiriting is an understatement.”

Greenhouse, who received a Pulitzer Prize for her coverage of the Supreme Court, told National Public Radio (NPR) she would not be backing away from the remarks, saying, “Let the chips fall where they may.”

MSNBC reports that Greenhouse has been reprimanded by the NYT for her participation in 1989 in a large abortion rally in Washington.

NPR’s interviewer quoted Daniel Okrent, who served as the Times’ first public editor, as saying he was surprised by her remarks.

“It’s been a basic tenet of journalism ... that the reporter’s ideology (has) to be suppressed and submerged, so the reader has absolute confidence that what he or she is reading is not coloured by previous views,” he said.

The job of a public editor at a newspaper is to criticise the practices, standards and culture of the newspaper, to identify and examine critical errors and omissions, and to act as a liaison to the public.

It has long been well known, however, that the New York Times is heavily biased in favour of abortion and the full political and social program of radical feminism. The Times has been a major influence behind many of the legal changes that have transformed North American Society according to feminist ideas.

A search of the New York Times website reveals that Linda Greenhouse has covered the abortion issue in at least 138 articles since 1981 as part of her Supreme Court coverage. Many of her articles in the last 20 years have featured the fears of abortion activists that their movement has been “under threat” by various forces, particularly the “religious right.”

Okrent told NPR he had not received a single complaint of bias in Greenhouse’s

[wagglebee]

Linda Greenhouse, speaking at a Harvard University appearance this summer, complained of a “sustained assault on women’s reproductive freedom and the hijacking of public policy by religious fundamentalism. To say that these last few years have been dispiriting is an understatement.”

"Reproductive rights" mean you get to HAVE BABIES, not murder them.

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping.

[onyx]

You mean a NYT 'journalist' has an agenda?

[laweeks]

"sustained assault on women’s reproductive freedo"

I believe in "reproductive freedom." But the abortion happens AFTER the reproduction. It's amazing that they continue with this argument!

[wagglebee]

I'm simply shocked, after all this is the "paper of record."

[SamuraiScot]

"To say that these last few years have been dispiriting is an understatement.”

I'm so sorry to hear that. But look at it this way: At least no one stuck scissors into your skull.

Sociopath.

[onyx]

I'm right with you: SHOCKED.
LOL

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

Of course this is no surprise! Why even write about it?

[Jaysun]

".....and the hijacking of public policy by religious fundamentalism.

Stupid trollop. What is now considered "religious fundamentalism" has always ruled the day in America - until about 4 decades ago. And we were a lot better for it.

[driftless2]

Greenhouse is just continuing in the tradition of Anna "have I mentioned abortion lately" Quinlan who wrote ad nauseum about abortion "rights". Quinlan even criticized Mo Dowd for not writing about abortion "rights" enough. Believe it or not.

[blues_guitarist]

[Doctor Raoul]

Greenhouse is a little late, we already knew.

[doc1019]

She works for the NYTs … go figure!

[Balding_Eagle]

A further answer to prayer.

I LIKE the divisions that are becoming more and more evident in our country.

Linda Greenhouse 'coming out' as she has is surprising only in that she admits her bias. It's always been there, just hidden.

I have no problem with the NYT's openly admitting their anti-American Values bias. More power to them.

[okie01]

“It’s been a basic tenet of journalism ... that the reporter’s ideology (has) to be suppressed and submerged, so the reader has absolute confidence that what he or she is reading is not coloured by previous views,” [public editor Dan Okrent] said.

In other words, Dan, one shouldn't get caught slanting the news? It would be "unprofessional" -- because the objective is to confer absolute confidence to slanted reports?

[quark]

GLIB LIB CRIBS FIB, LEFTY BASE LOSES FACE

[firebrand]

Wait. You're not talking about the New York Times? How can this BE???

[wagglebee]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655829/posts

[BLS]

"New York Times Writer of 138 Stories on Abortion Admits Pro-Abortion Bias"


Color me surprised. NOT!

[Robwin]

Oh, pshaw. Another of my childhood beliefs shattered. If you can't trust the NYT, who can you trust?

[onyx]

Imagine that!

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Linda Greenhouse, speaking at a Harvard University appearance this summer, complained of a “sustained assault on women’s reproductive freedom and the hijacking of public policy by religious fundamentalism. To say that these last few years have been dispiriting is an understatement.”

May she live to see something she finds really dispiriting. That's why the next two elections are so important.

[Bob J]

"“It’s been a basic tenet of journalism ... that the reporter’s ideology (has) to be suppressed and submerged, so the reader has absolute confidence that what he or she is reading is not coloured by previous views,” he said."

Laugher of the day.

[daku]

"The New York Times reputation for objectivity ..."

??????????????

[highimpact]

The most surprising part of the whole story is that she survived a liberal pregnancy.

[KoRn]

Reminds me of awhile back when, I think it was an ABC "journalist" who did lots of reporting dealing with gun control issues was revealed to be involved with anti gun ownership groups.

[Coleus]

the new york slimes, biased? Nah, it could never be. After the slimes leaked top-secret and classified info. that put many American lives at risk, we need to get a petition going to get the NY officials to change the name of Times Square

[Dajjal]

Pro-Life bump

[Clemenza]

Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!

[ElkGroveDan]

We need to pray for Linda and women like her. She's obviously living with a whole lot of internalized pain and guilt on this issue. She needs to come to terms with whatever it is in her past that's causing this, and seek forgiveness. Until she does that she's going to remain a angry and unhappy person.

[Always Right]

Linda Greenhouse

Speaking of greenhouse, the New York Times out to look into whoever rights the global warming propaganda pieces. There just might be a slight bit of bias on those puppies.

[choirboy]

So this is where the Greenhouse gases come from!

[wagglebee]

I would say that printing several million unread newspapers a day that are subsequently burned produces a lot of greenhouse gases.

[NewLand]

“It’s been a basic tenet of journalism ... that the reporter’s ideology (has) to be suppressed and submerged, so the reader has absolute confidence that what he or she is reading is not coloured by previous views,” he said.

I had to double check this site to make certain this wasn't a joke...NYT...NPR...ideology's submerged? Really, now.

Funniest thing I've heard all day.

[boop]

Or, how Dan Rather didn't "realize" he was speaking at a democrat fund raiser. No, not possible it was "bias"

[cpforlife.org]

This is odd because I've always considered the New York Times and excellent resource of unbiased news as well as as an excellent liner for my bird's cage and very good fish wrapper. Also comes in handy for small painting jobs.

Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

[narses]

+

If you want on (or off) this Catholic and Pro-Life ping list, let me know!

[greccogirl]

The media biased? Nah, can't be!

[Victoria Delsoul]

Many of her articles in the last 20 years have featured the fears of abortion activists that their movement has been “under threat” by various forces, particularly the “religious right.”

Nope, I can't find any bias in that statement.

[Victoria Delsoul]

I meant to post to cpforlife.org, lol.

[narses]

S'ok!

[caveat emptor]

“It’s been a basic tenet of journalism ... that the reporter’s ideology (has) to be suppressed and submerged, so the reader has absolute confidence that what he or she is reading is not coloured by previous views,” he said.

Some reporter's just can't contain their enthusiasm for "abortion rights".

[the lone wolf]

Am I reading this right, that she was reprimanded in 2006 for a protest that she was involved in in 1989?

Nope, no bias here...

[Lexinom]

And you even get the right to choose whether or not to try to have babies.

[Southack]

Wow! NY Slimes reporters with personal agendas. Who woulda thunk it?!

Still, it's good to call them on it.

[Pharmboy]

Here's that paragon of all that is holy in American journalism...someone dedicated to truth and objectivity in reporting:

Linda Greenhouse

[little jeremiah]

It's also not bad for crumping up and starting the fire in the woodstove.

Just seeing a copy of the NYT makes my skin crawl.

[Salvation]

**Linda Greenhouse**

Linda, we are praying for your conversion as a pro-choice, pro-killer, anti-baby, anti-life person.

[Salvation]

I bet she's glad her mother didn't choose abortion!

[cpforlife.org]

Victoria,

If you have a fireplace, PLEASE be mindful that burning The New York Times indoors requires extra caution and increased ventilation, as the bias dioxide gases, BS₃O₂ emitted are extremely toxic and even low levels of inhalation can cause short term loss of honesty humanity and common sense. And it just plain stinks really bad.