The day after the March for Life, a one-sided article from Reuters touted the safety of abortion.
But Reuters failed to include vital information about the study and the people it quoted - namely, that the authors of the study and both of the experts it cited were either abortion doctors or had strong ties to the abortion industry.
The study Reuters was referencing was authored by Elizabeth Raymond and Dr. David Grimes. David Grimes was described by the Los Angeles Times in 1990 as "North America's best-known researcher on RU-486, the French-made abortion drug that opponents call "the death pill," "the chemical coat hanger," "the human pesticide" and "the Dalkon Shield of the '90s." Grimes also protested against restrictions on partial birth abortion in 2007.
Elizabeth Raymond works for Gynuity Health Projects, which states that it "works globally to ensure that reproductive health technologies are available at reasonable cost." Raymond's bio notes that she considers abortion to be a "centerpiece of health issues for women."
In other words, avowed pro-abortion advocates did the study. How surprising it turned out favorable to abortion!
The two outside "experts" the Reuters article quoted - both of whom Reuters made sure to point out weren't "involved in the new study" and "didn't participate in the research" - had strong ties to the abortion industry as well. Anna Davis, who was described as a doctor "who studies obstetrics and gynecology at the Columbia University Medical Center in New York," writes for the pro-abortion blog RH Reality Check - and is a former board member of the pro-abortion supporting Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health. And Bryna Harwood, the other expert quoted by Reuters, was associated with the same group as Davis, and is an abortion doctor herself.
Needless to say, pro-life sources were nowhere to be found in the Reuters article.
The purpose of the Reuters article was very clear - to push for fewer restrictions on abortion. The article included numerous telltale quotes from Harwood, such as this one: "What makes it complicated, Harwood added, is when the law interferes and requires doctors to state information that isn't always balanced or medically sound - usually exaggerating the risk of abortion."
Reuters, the abortionist's best friend.