The website of the NewsHour on PBS has a NewsHour Extra for students. Its Extra article by Lizzy Berryman on President Obama’s speech at Notre Dame carried this surprising sentence: "While historically Democrats have been pro-choice, in recent years Democratic candidates have softened their rhetoric. President Obama has defended a woman's right to choose -- but says abortion should be rare and may be restricted."
Considering that candidate Obama pledged to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, scrapping every state abortion restriction, that’s not exactly an accurate picture for students to read. In captions of Presidents Obama and Bush, Obama was merely "pro-choice," while Bush was an "ardent opponent of abortion rights."
The bias was even more obvious at the article’s end, which sought to explain away the new Gallup poll showing a 51-42 chasm in favor of the pro-life position. The article’s subhead painted away the victory: "Polls show Americans are divided on the abortion issue." The actual 51-42 gap is never mentioned:
A Gallup poll released last week states that the number of Americans who identify as "pro-life" has increased, making it the first time since 1995, that more people identify as pro-life then [sic] pro-choice.
The increase was almost entirely amongst Republicans—who may be more concerned about abortion now that there is a pro-choice president, according to Amy Walters [sic], a polling expert and editor-in-chief of the Hotline.
The American National Election Studies board also studies public opinion about abortion and does not ask individuals if they are "pro-life" or "pro-choice" but rather under what circumstances they think abortion should be legal. Their most recent findings state that 41 percent still believe abortion is a matter of personal choice and should be legal while only 15 percent believe abortion should never be permitted.
There is still 44 percent in the middle who may call themselves "pro-life" or "pro-choice" but who believe that abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances: when the pregnancy is the result of rape and/or incest, when it is a threat the mother’s life, and/or "when the need has been established."
Steven Waldman of Beliefnet told the NewsHour that "the majority of the population is in the middle, which is to say, they want abortion to be legal, but with restrictions."
This only underlines why the NewsHour summarizers look manipulative with the facts: if a majority of Americans want restrictions on abortions, that majority is at odds with President Obama's rhetoric and record.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Abortion polls
May 21, 2009 - 17:13 ET by shawn228Tim,
While I agree that Obama is without a doubt a pro choice President, I believe that the poll does not prove much. I am a strong believer of polls but 1 poll that takes samples from people during a three day span does not prove much.
You need to look at consistency for a long period of time, according the Presidential primaries last year the nominees would be Clinton and Guiliani and opinion polls shifted very quickly as months went on. Example of consistent polling was George Bushes approval rating or Congress's approval rating which were at historic lows.
He had my vote
Shawn the only thing an
May 22, 2009 - 11:25 ET by Dan The Man 2Shawn the only thing an opinion poll does is prove people have opinions. They are not to be trusted at all because of teh methodology used. Opinions are like a$$es, everyone has one.
The entire abortion debate flawed
May 21, 2009 - 17:46 ET by richb313The entire abortion debate is flawed from the outset. The only question that needs to be decided that can never be answered to the satisfaction of anyone is when life begins. The entire Privacy argument and what a woman chooses to do with her body is not relevant. The fetus has a unique genetic identity that is different than the mother. The woman after conception to put it bluntly the incubator. The decision comes down to this, does the incubator have the right to terminate life. It can only be answered honestly if we can be certain when life begins. I do not know but I prefer to err with caution. To not err with caution is by its very definition is to be open to making a grevious mistake.
"While historically
May 21, 2009 - 17:46 ET by MidAmerica"While historically Democrats have been pro-choice, in recent years Democratic candidates have softened their rhetoric.
Why yes, they've become such softies on abortion that they have a new theme song for the clinics to play...
Killing Me Softly With His Song
Roberta Flack
I heard he sang a good song
I heard he had a style
And so I came to see him
To listen for a while
And there he was this young boy
A stranger to my eyes
Strumming my pain with his fingers
Singing my life with his words
Killing me softly with his song
Killing me softly with his song
Telling my whole life with his words
Killing me softly with his song
MA.... Perfect. Thank
May 21, 2009 - 18:03 ET by bigtimerMA....
Perfect.
Thank you.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Hi bt...
May 21, 2009 - 18:22 ET by MidAmericaThe zeal that obama has towards abortion is a real psychological mystery. He is ashamed of our treatment of mass murdering terrorists but feels no empathy for an innocent baby. And I mean baby because he if he had his way an unborn but viable child could be disposed of like trash simply because a woman chose to do it. Even if you only thought of the issue in terms of a woman's rights, how can you not grieve for the killing of a little child?
What if....
May 21, 2009 - 21:09 ET by MidAmericaWhat if obama is actually a self loathing personality that suffers from psychological distress from being a mixed race child abandoned by his parents and raised by the 'white' side of his family which is not the side his genes chose for expression. Perhaps he suffered great emotional distress and had wished many times he had not been born. So now as an adult he sees a great 'need' to not bring into the world 'unwanted' children. It would also explain his comment about not wishing his daughters be 'punished with a baby'. And of course, this 'Christian' obama wants to force every doctor to perform abortions even if the doctor does not want to based on personal beliefs. Obama demands his blood sacrifice of 'unwanted' children, no exceptions. very sick
MidAmerica
May 21, 2009 - 22:26 ET by BondPlainBondExcellent!
Softened rhetoric on abortion
May 21, 2009 - 17:51 ET by jefflebowskiHey Hussein Hopenchange, have they softened their techniques or are they still sucking out the brains of viable human beings? Yes, we have seen the softened rhetoric of the left in the Miss California series of disgusting attacks from leftoids with no class! Pssst Obama, we don't believe anything you say!
Angry White Dude
www.angrywhitedude.c...
Everything is tangential ...
May 21, 2009 - 20:38 ET by KC MulvilleWhen the media reports about abortion, they report on everything except the actual issue. It's all about polls, or rhetoric, or analysts talking about how polls or rhetoric. But they don't ever debate the actual issues, whether it's the humanity of the baby or the freedom of the woman or the line between government and individual choice. They claim not to have the time to do in-depth analysis, but they have plenty of time for poll results.
If you want to say that abortion is a complicated issue and isn't suited for TV, fine, but then don't waste the time on polls.
_____
I point out, at the risk of annoying readers (sorry), that here again the media is openly trying to "shape worldviews."
Do you really want an airhead TV producer shaping anyone's worldview? They need their own worldview re-shaped a little, if you ask me.
Sorry if this has been covered,
May 21, 2009 - 22:39 ET by RESTLESS 1but since I didn't see an OT today, I'll put this here. As if our taxes don't go to enough BS already.
This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
R1... LOL...I heard about
May 21, 2009 - 22:51 ET by bigtimerR1...
LOL...I heard about this...I have seen this done before, not as long as this is I don't think, it's too bad more people in this country understand what this all really means.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Propaganda, Brainwashing, Indoctrination
May 21, 2009 - 22:26 ET by BondPlainBondWhy didn't PBS tell kids the WHOLE TRUTH?
That their President, a Democrat, is in favor of killing babies? That their President, a Democrat, voted four times in favor of preventing babies born of failed abortions any life-saving medical assistance. That their President, a Democrat, wants those babies to be left to die. That their President, a Democrat, said a woman should get what she paid for - an abortion - not a baby.
Why would PBS deny these children the TRUTH about their President?
The Proletariat Broadcasting Service doing what it does best
May 21, 2009 - 22:31 ET by R D HelmLying through the TV to the government-schooled DumbmAsses.
-Dave
Maybe PBS is telling the
May 22, 2009 - 01:05 ET by MrSnugglesMaybe PBS is telling the truth, maybe they have softened their rhetoric. But so what? Talk is cheap, and they will vote to make it easier to kill babies whenever the chance arises.
Moral disconnect
May 22, 2009 - 01:26 ET by Parker1227Water-boarding genicidal bigots is a crime aganst humanity, but spiking the brain of a partially born baby is a protected right?
As the Fugees sang . . .
May 22, 2009 - 11:09 ET by TrochilusSo now, he's Mr. Softee, singing a new tune?
Kinda makes you think of the old Fugees song . . .
"Strumming my pain with his fingers,
Yes he was Singing my life with his words,
killing me softly with his song,
Killing me softly with his song,
Telling my whole life with his words,
Killing me softly with his song."
This is the same bullscat
May 22, 2009 - 14:14 ET by mattmThis is the same bullscat Clinton was slinging in 1992. "Safe, legal and rare."
Safe is debatable. Legal is the status quo. Rare - well, they just say that, they don't really mean it...it's just rhetoric.
If they really believed in making it rare, they would support overturning the atrocious Roe v. Wade decision and let states LEGISLATE their own policy.
The ensuing debate would generate a compromise position in which abortion would still probably be legal, but with restrictions which vary from one state to another. But does anyone actually think the Obamites would even consider this kind of reasonable approach?
No way! All they offer is rhetoric (i.e. lies).... It's not "safe, legal and rare" that they want, it's abortion anytime, all the time, paid for mainly by taxpayers.