A few dozen left-wing activists protesting Rev. Rick Warren were worthy of a Times story plus a large photo. But when tens of thousands marched in D.C. at the pro-life March for Life, they were completely ignored by the Times for the second year in a row.
A few dozen left-wing activists protesting Rev. Rick Warren outside Martin Luther King's home church in Atlanta were worthy of both a story and a large photo in Tuesday's paper
. Yet when tens of thousands marched in D.C. for a conservative cause - the March for Life, on the 35th
anniversary of Roe v. Wade - they were completely ignored by the Times. This marks the second year in a row
the Times has totally ignored the march in its print edition.
The Washington Post found the pro-life march newsworthy, making it a Page 2 story. The Los Angeles Times also ran a story, albeitone accompanied bya misleading photo of a pro-choice protestor.
But the New York Times contented itself to a post on its political blog in which the march itself didn't even make the headline: "On 35th Anniversary, Obama Praises Roe v. Wade Precedent."
President Barack Obama reaffirmed his commitment to protecting abortion rights on Wednesday, the 35th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, and said that it "stands for a broader principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters."
The march wasn't mentioned until paragraph five.
Mr. Obama's position has anti-abortion groups worried. The president of National Right to Life, Wanda Franz, predicted that the president would pursue a "radical agenda" and on his watch, the number of abortions would "increase dramatically."
And on the National Mall, where millions gathered on Tuesday to witness Mr. Obama's inauguration, tens of thousands held a rally today marking the Roe v. Wade anniversary, followed by a march to the steps of the Supreme Court.