Abortion and Journalistic Objectivity

By Hughes, John | The Christian Science Monitor, July 18, 1990 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Abortion and Journalistic Objectivity


Hughes, John, The Christian Science Monitor


MAJOR issues like Vietnam and the civil rights movement have tested the objectivity of journalists over the years, and now the issue that is challenging journalistic ethics is abortion.

Eyebrows were raised when a number of reporters and editors from the Washington Post, the New York Times, and other newspapers marched in a pro-abortion demonstration in Washington last year.

After the march, top Washington Post editors rebuked their participating staffers, saying: "It is unprofessional for you to take part in political demonstrations, no matter on which side or how seemingly worthy the cause." Post managing editor Leonard Downie Jr. recommended that reporters not have opinions on issues like abortion.

To suggest that they not have opinions may be going too far. Reporters would be pretty pale people if they did not develop viewpoints about the great issues they cover. But those viewpoints should remain personal and private. A reporter should not be perceived by his or her readers to be partisan.

Public identification with one side or another - as in marching in a demonstration - raises reasonable doubts in a reader's mind about that reporter's objectivity when the time comes to write about the issue.

The problem of covering the abortion debate fairly is compounded by the fact there is much more pro-abortion sentiment abroad in American newsrooms than there is anti-abortion feeling.

After eight months of research, the Center for Media and Public Affairs concluded that the three network news shows and the Washington Post and New York Times quoted nearly twice as many pro-abortion sources as anti. In stories filed by women reporters on the two newspapers, the pro-abortion advantage was three to one. A network news official told U.S. News and World Report: "The problem, pure and simple, is that the media's loaded with women who are strongly pro-choice."

The Washington Post's own ombudsman, Richard Harwood, concluded that his paper's "shabby" coverage of a Washington anti-abortion rally in April "left a blot on the paper's professional reputation.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Abortion and Journalistic Objectivity
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?