NPR Did 100 Stories on Trayvon Martin, Three on Kermit Gosnell

National   |   John Williams   |   Jun 21, 2013   |   1:38PM   |   Washington, DC

As a news organization funded in large part by those on the left and staffed by those on the left, NPR often hews to the priorities of the left in its coverage.

Those priorities deem the death of one individual, Trayvon Martin—a black teen killed by a non-black man—to be far more newsworthy than the gruesome deaths of numerous black babies killed by abortionist Kermit Gosnell just after birth.

In the 15 months between Zimmerman’s shooting of Trayvon Martin and the start of jury selection, NPR aired about 100 pieces dedicated to the issue. Contrast that with the number of pieces NPR aired about Kermit Gosnell in the 36 months between a federal raid on his clinic and the start of jury selection: just 3 pieces. That works out to one piece about every five days for Zimmerman and one piece about every 12 months for Gosnell.

The massive disparity in coverage doesn’t end there. From just the start of jury selection to the finalizing of the jury pool, NPR has already dedicated 3 pieces to the Zimmerman trial. Contrast that with their coverage of the Kermit Gosnell trial from the start of jury selection until the verdict: 0.



It’s not that NPR had the human resources available to cover the George Zimmerman trial, but didn’t for the Kermit Gosnell trial. For the Zimmerman trial, NPR chose to send their lone Miami Correspondent and their lone Alabama-based Southern Bureau Chief to Orlando. For the Gosnell trial, they could have sent any number of journalists from their closer Washington, DC or New York City offices to Philadelphia. But they didn’t even have to do that–they could have simply requested that NPR’s Philly-based Correspondent cover the trial or that someone from the large local news operation of their Philly affiliate WHYY cover the trial. Instead, NPR chose to not get anyone to cover the Gosnell trial.

While NPR is understandably inclined to track news judgment with the political priorities of those who largely fund them and staff their news operations, doing so is not an option. They claim that they are an impartial news organization, receive funding from local, state and federal taxpayers (most of it indirectly from member stations), and are actually required by federal law to be objective and balanced.

LifeNews Note: John Williams writes for Newsbusters.