In the domain of what properly constitutes human rights issues, forced abortions and sterilizations have to fall in that category. So why isn't the Washington Post describing Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng as a "human rights activist"?
In two stories packaged side-by-side on page A9 of the May 8 paper, the Post's Andrew Higgins and Keith B. Richburg failed to use the term to describe Chen. Higgins tagged Chen a "blind activist," as in an activist who is blind, not an activist for the blind, but the term could confuse casual readers unfamiliar with Chen's plight. Richburg opened his story by tagging Chen as "the self-taught lawyer who has become the center of a diplomatic crisis between the United States and China."
What's more, while at least Higgins made note of the fact that Chen had been protesting forced abortions; nowhere in Richburg's article was that fact mentioned.
You may recall that last week, Washington Examiner's Tim Carney noticed that the Post was reluctant to go into detail about how Chen was in trouble with Chinese authorities for having "exposed the horrors of China’s one-child policy, including forced abortions and forced sterilizations."