New York Times Refuses to Correct False Claim Only “Hundreds” Participated in March for Life

National   |   Micaiah Bilger   |   Feb 5, 2016   |   5:26PM   |   Washington, DC

No one denies that fewer people attended this year’s March for Life in Washington, D.C., which began just as a massive snowstorm hit the East Cost.

The storm dumped several feet of snow on the D.C. area, and some pro-life groups got stuck in the snow on their return trip from D.C. Despite the weather, March for Life Director Jeanne Monahan roughly estimated that tens of thousands of people participated in the Jan. 22 event.

The annual March for Life typically draws hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers to the nation’s capital in January on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that opened the doors to abortion on demand. Unfortunately, the huge pro-life rally seldom receives the media attention that it warrants, and this year was no exception.

The Daily Caller reporter Evan Gahr recently called out the The New York Times for vastly underestimating the number of pro-lifers who attended the 2016 March for Life. Gahr published a scathing article about his unsuccessful attempt to convince the newspaper to correct its estimate. The conservative news site reports:

The New York Times is standing by its demonstrably false claim by somebody who apparently wrote their story entirely from his desk that just “hundreds” of people marched.

Why? Because, just like a pair of eight-year-old bratty twins who refuse to eat their vegetables, they just don’t feel like it.

Washington bureau chief Elisabeth Bumiller and other editors at the paper … ignored repeated emails since the story was published January 22.

But reached on the phone late this afternoon, Bumiller said, “We’ve been through this” and demanded to know why she was being asked about it anyway.

Uh, maybe, because she is the paper’s DC head?

Bumiller replied that, “We decided it did not merit a correction.”

On what basis?

“Because the information was correct.”

Gahr also contacted the reporter, Nicholas Fandos, and asked him if he attended the March and how he came up with the number of people who attended. Fandos replied that he was not “able to help” answer the questions.



Gahr noted that even the Washington Post, which is no friend to the pro-life movement, estimated that thousands of pro-lifers marched in D.C. this January. Photos and videos of the March for Life crowd also are evidence that tens of thousands attended.

Gahr called the newspaper’s refusal to correct the estimate “a testament to a hodgepodge of liberal bias and arrogance.”

This is not the first time the New York Times has been called out for errors on the abortion issue. Last August, the newspaper took 16 days to admit that the full, unedited Planned Parenthood videos by the Center for Medical Progress were released. Last June, the news outlet also was forced to print a correction after it misstated when unborn babies are viable.

But the New York Times is not the only news outlet that under-reported the March for Life. The Media Research Center reports that the three major TV news networks dedicated more than 9 ½ minutes to a story about the National Zoo’s new panda cub — 26 times more coverage than they gave to the 2016 march.

“There’s no denying that panda cubs are cute and attention-worthy,” MRC’s Katie Yoder wrote about the March for Life coverage. “But there’s something terribly wrong when the the networks devote minutes to animals, while only sparing seconds to human beings.”