Do you remember the March for our Lives a few weeks ago? Of course you do. It was all over social media. But more importantly, news outlets covered it essentially non-stop.
But did you see the recent Pro-Life Walkout? Probably not, and the media is largely to blame for that, as well.
On April 11th at 10:00 am, students united in a walkout to protest abortion and Planned Parenthood. Event planners designed the protest to parallel the anti-gun walkout that occurred on March 14th. More than 191 high schools, and 81 colleges participated in this national walkout. The official description on their website calls for the end of legal abortion and the defunding of Planned Parenthood:
On Wednesday, April 11th, we will walk out of our classes for 17 minutes of silence and prayer. We will stand silently outside honoring the 10 children who will violently die during that time at a Planned Parenthood abortion facility … We will kneel and pray for the end of legal abortion in our nation.
Considering the media obsession with covering student-run protests, they probably covered this extensively, right? Not at all.
News outlets essentially ignored the existence of this protest all together. Major television networks like ABC, CBS, and NBC did not mention the pro-life walkout a single time. They did, however, talk about the anti-gun walkout for more than 10 minutes according to the Media Research Center. It is also important to note that the media, on average, covered the March For Our Lives protest 13 times more than they have ever covered the annual March For Life.
Why is this the case? Was the Pro-Life Walkout less important than the March for our Lives? Do most news outlets put political bias aside, cover the news objectively, and stick to facts instead of their subjective policy preferences?
Everyone knows the answer to that: of course not. The media has proven time and time again that they see everything through a biased lens. Many outlets have a history of putting their subjective policy preferences above objectively reporting the news. Even though what they report isn’t always objectively false, it is often strategically cherry picked and framed. Media outlets’ choices in presenting news often have subconscious effects on viewers.
Even more important, however, is what they choose not to cover.
Of course, media companies have the right to report (or not) as they choose. The First Amendment protects their right to say what they want. However, objective journalism is crucial to a free nation. Media outlets ought to at least be honest about their intentions, instead of dishonestly claiming to be objective and hiding their biases.
The numbers above speak for themselves. The media is not giving you the whole story.