A Canadian Media Blackout

Editor's note. Americans are familiar with media blackouts. But, I'm told, we have nothing on our Canadian pro-life brethren who have an even more difficult time garnering attention when something positive happens. The following letter of protest was sent by Dr. Paul Ranalli to the editor-in-chief of Canada's most prominent newspaper, the Globe and Mail.

July 31, 2002

Edward Greenspon

Editor-in-Chief

Globe and Mail

Dear Mr. Greenspon,

On Thursday, July 25, the U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly (274-151) to pass an Act banning "partial-birth abortion," a late-term procedure so gruesome it has split the pro- choice establishment. If the bill passes the Senate in the fall, it will be signed by President Bush, the first rollback of unfettered abortion since Roe v. Wade in 1973. News, by anyone's definition.

This was reported in the National Post, in a sizable article on page A12.

Unless I missed it, the Globe did not - - and has not - - reported this story. Not even one of those little one-paragraph boxes. Not a word. A 7-day check of the Globe Web site fails to pick up any trailing story. The only mention - - if it can be called that - - is part of a frothing, erratic rant of an opinion piece by Heather Mallick [July 27], in which she mentions the bill, inaccurately in several respects. She mentions that she read about the bill, but doesn't say where. Clearly, she didn't read about it in the Globe.

The Globe and Mail has a markedly pro-abortion editorial position. We all know that. Opinion pieces, however hysterical and bitter, largely fall under the aegis of fair comment. Agreed.

Maybe the story was just missed. Maybe it was strangled in the backroom.

A good, balanced piece by Alan Woods on the local abortion- clinic protest could have slipped in a paragraph or two about the House vote, if there wasn't room for a full story.

But no.

Having had time to review this, I'd like to know your position on this.

Sincerely,

Paul Ranalli