‘Non-partisan’ NPR Provides Journalists With Guide On Framing Abortion Positively

Written by Wes Walker on May 23, 2019

In case the Media(D) needed help on writing Pro-Abortion propaganda, NPR has provided some guidelines.

Is it because simply reporting the news is SO last century, and now they insist on shaping it? In that case, do it without any of the tax dollars you take from the half the country you actively oppose.

It’s stories like this one that drives those perennial calls to cut off NPR’s federal funding.

Mark Memmott offered some tips on how to speak to the public in ways that would bolster the cause for abortion. Notice the impartial and entirely ‘professional’ and ‘journalistic’ use of terms like OUR and THEIR.

Don’t Call it a Heartbeat Bill.

(Even though the heartbeat is the determining criteria of whether it takes effect.)

One thing to keep in mind about this law and others like it: Proponents refer to it as a “fetal heartbeat” law. That is their term. It needs to be attributed to them if used and put in quotation marks if printed. We should not simply say the laws are about when a “fetal heartbeat” is detected. As we’ve reported, heartbeat activity can be detected “about six weeks into a pregnancy.” That’s at least a few weeks before an embryo is a fetus.

Would they be OK with ’embryonic heartbeat law’? Of course not. Their problem isn’t the word ‘fetus’ being misapplied. It’s the HUMANIZING effect of the word HEARTBEAT, which they are desperately trying to avoid.

He continues, with what passes for professional objectivity. Judge for yourself how impartial it is:

ABORTION PROCEDURES & TERMINOLOGY: Use the term intact dilation and extraction to describe the procedure, or a procedure known medically as intact dilation and extraction; opponents call it partial-birth abortion. On the latter, it is necessary to point out that the term partial-birth is used by those opposed to the procedure; simply using the phrase so-called partial birth abortion is not sufficient without explaining who’s calling it that. Partial-birth is not a medical term and has no exact parallel in medical terminology; intact dilation and extraction is the closest description. Also, it is not correct to call these procedures RARE — it is not known how often they are performed. Nor is it accurate to use the phrase LATE TERM ABORTION. Though we initially believed this term carried less ideological baggage when compared with partial-birth, it still conveys the sense that the fetus is viable when the abortion is performed. It gives the impression that the abortion takes place in the 8th or 9th month. In fact, the procedure called intact dilation and extraction is performed most often in the 5th or 6th month — the second trimester — and the second trimester is not considered “late” pregnancy. Thus “late term” is not appropriate. As an alternative, call it a certain procedure performed after the first trimester of pregnancy and, subsequently, the procedure…. Also note:

NPR doesn’t use the term “abortion clinics.” We say instead, “medical or health clinics that perform abortions.” The point is to not to use abortion before the word clinic. The clinics perform other procedures and not just abortions.

Do not refer to murdered Dr George Tiller as an “Abortion Doctor.” Instead we should say Tiller operated a clinic where abortions are performed. We can also make reference to the fact that Tiller was a doctor who performed late abortions.

Here’s some additional guidance from Joe Neel, regarding the Unborn Victims of Violence Act:

The term “unborn” implies that there is a baby inside a pregnant woman, not a fetus. Babies are not babies until they are born. They’re fetuses. Incorrectly calling a fetus a “baby” or “the unborn” is part of the strategy used by antiabortion groups to shift language/legality/public opinion. Use “unborn” only when referring to the title of the bill (and after President Bush signs it, the Unborn Victims of Violence Law). Or qualify the use of “unborn” by saying “what anti-abortion groups call the ‘unborn’ victims of violence.” The most neutral language to refer to the death of a fetus during a crime is “fetal homicide.”


On the air, we should use “abortion rights supporter(s)/advocate(s)” and “abortion rights opponent(s)” or derivations thereof (for example: “advocates of abortion rights”). It is acceptable to use the phrase “anti-abortion rights,” but do not use the term “pro-abortion rights”. Digital News will continue to use the AP style book for online content, which mirrors the revised NPR policy. Do not use “pro-life” and “pro-choice” in copy except when used in the name of a group. Of course, when the terms are used in an actuality they should remain.
Source: NPR

Let’s do a quick review of some key points (this is by no means meant to be exhaustive):

To the average American with no technical expertise (regardless of their views for or against abortion) some of the medical terms they insist on using are meaningless bafflegab that cloud communication and obscure meaning.

As for the insistence on using the word Fetus, it’s from Latin. It means ‘Offspring’. Offspring is a word found in the Cambridge Dictionary:

Maybe NPR would be more comfortable with using the term ‘child’ instead of ‘baby’. It’s a direct synonym, after all.

And your own words testify against you. Pro-life advocates invoke the word BABY to HUMANIZE the unborn child in EXACTLY THE SAME WAY that Pro-Abortion advocates invoke clinical and sterile terms to DEHUMANIZE the unborn child and REMOVE any of the natural horror people feel to an act so gruesome that Abortion Advocates get VERY agitated when they encounter large color photographs of what the ‘simple procedure’ looks like in real life.

And why shy away from Abortion Clinic or abortion doctor? If a doctor specialized in say podiatry, there would be no linguistic cartwheels to avoid calling him a ‘foot doctor’. It would be perfectly acceptable. Just like Plastic Surgeon is acceptable.

It’s only because the word ‘abortion’ is considered ‘loaded’ which is weird since there is now a ‘shout your abortion’ movement.

He huffs and puffs about not using OUR terms, and then, at the end, he explicitly defines the Pro-life crowd by the language of Abortion advocates, which tilts the debate in once side’s favor.

On the air, we should use “abortion rights supporter(s)/advocate(s)” and “abortion rights opponent(s)” or derivations thereof (for example: “advocates of abortion rights”). It is acceptable to use the phrase “anti-abortion rights,” but do not use the term “pro-abortion rights”.

If you wanted to CORRECTLY define the Pro-life position in terms of ‘rights’ it would NOT be ‘Anti-abortion rights’.

In ‘neutral’ and ‘clinical terms’ it would be fairer and more accurate to say we are ‘Pro-FETAL rights’.

We are FOR something.

We are FOR that unborn life growing inside the mother AFTER the REPRODUCTIVE act that begets life has long since occurred.

ClashDaily.com’s, Editor-In-Chief, Doug Giles how-to book:

Raising Righteous & Rowdy Girls

In ‘Raising Righteous and Rowdy Girls’, Doug Giles reinforces the notion that little women don’t need to be pampered by their fathers to turn out right. And having met his beautiful daughters, I know his philosophy works. As a strong-willed woman who thinks her daddy is the greatest guy in the world, I can tell you this is a must-read for every man who hopes to earn the same title. —-S.E. Cupp Best Selling Author & Fox News Analyst

You Might Like