Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LA TImes Changes "Pro-life" to "Anti-abortion"
NewsMax ^ | 3/4/04 | Limbacher

Posted on 03/04/2004 9:53:02 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection

A Los Angeles Times critic is up in arms because the paper changed the "pro-life" language in his review of an opera - and the opera has absolutely nothing to do with abortion.

According to LA Observed, critic Mark Swed's review of the Richard Strauss opera "Die Frau Ohne Schatten," which described the work as "an incomparably glorious and goofy pro-life paean...," was altered to say "anti-abortion," instead of "pro-life."

While the opera extols motherhood, it makes no references to abortion, and Swed was in a sweat over the Times' altering his writing to imply something he had not meant to infer.

But his anger reportedly mounted after the Times ran a correction that failed to make it clear that Swed was not responsible for the error, stating only that "A review of Los Angeles Opera's 'Die Frau Ohne Schatten' in Tuesday's Calendar section incorrectly characterized the work as 'anti-abortion.' In fact, there is no issue of abortion in the opera, which extols procreation."

As a result, the Times ran another correction stating that "A correction in Wednesday's paper about the review of Los Angeles Opera's 'Die Frau Ohne Schatten' incorrectly implied that it was the reviewer who characterized the work as 'anti-abortion' in Tuesday's Calendar.

"As the correction should have made clear, the lead paragraph submitted by the reviewer was incorrectly changed to include the term 'anti-abortion.' There is no issue of abortion in the opera, which extols procreation." (The Times just can't bring itself to use such a politically incorrect word as "motherhood" which is what the opera is all about).

Commented one LA Observed reader: "The goofball editor who changed Swed's piece must have thought "pro-life" sounded too benign and pleasant. In his or her mind - likely biased in a liberal direction - "anti-abortion" probably sounded more appropriately pushy and rigid.

"Of course, that same editor never would have considered it necessary to change the phrase 'pro-choice,' were it in Swed's article, to 'pro-abortion.'"

Notes LA Observed: "As of March 3, at 4 p.m., the erroneous story than ran in the paper" remains on the LAT website with no correction attached.



TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: anti8abortion; bias; lat; latimes; liberalmedia; mediabias
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: GLDNGUN
I have a liberal aquaintance

The first thing you have to do is stop referring to him/her as "liberal" because he's not. He's a leftist.

I've found that making this distinction really ticks them off.

21 posted on 03/04/2004 11:16:16 AM PST by MrB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jwalburg
No, it is just a rule of the AP stylebook.

Sounds like an issue for the RICO statutes.
Or at the very least violations of rights due to a conspiracy, if everyone is expected to "comply".

Or else? Seig Heil!

22 posted on 03/04/2004 11:16:35 AM PST by Publius6961 (50.3% of Californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks (subject to a final count).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
I don't mind being labled "anti-abortion". Or anti-ripping babies apart. Or anti-murder. It's all the same to me.
23 posted on 03/04/2004 11:25:34 AM PST by Marie (My coffee cup is waaaaay too small to deal with this day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Yeap.....no such thing as liberal bias in the media. < /sarcasm >
24 posted on 03/04/2004 11:26:52 AM PST by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GLDNGUN
He's the same guy who comes over and brags about how he only paid $220K for his house which is just like yours when he knows you paid $300K.
25 posted on 03/04/2004 11:27:06 AM PST by Old Professer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MrB
"..stop referring to him/her as "liberal" because he's not. He's a leftist"

You got it, they are Leftists - PERIOD. 'Liberals' went the way of the Ford Pinto & Chevy Nova - they're all LEFTISTS now. And the lefties who call themselves 'progressives' are Marxist Commies. (see; Nancy Pelosi)

'Liberals' believe in liberty, leftists don't. They want the gubmint to control everything and everyone. So I guess that conservatives today are truly more of a 'liberal' in that sense than those who call themselves 'Liberals' - because we believe in liberty.


And yes, calling them leftists makes them apoplectic -- they don't like the fact that we see through their little charade. So I do it every chance I get!

26 posted on 03/04/2004 12:04:39 PM PST by Condor51 ("Diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments." -- Frederick the Great)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
I am in favor of calling the other side "pro-death" or maybe "pro baby murder for convience sake".

Be careful.  You might find yourself labelled  pro-welfare-breeders, or maybe "concerned right up until post-birth."
27 posted on 03/04/2004 12:07:02 PM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection; All
In my opinion, "pro-life" is a bit tricky. I know many people who are "pro-life", which to them means both opposed to abortion and opposed to the death penalty. (Interestingly, some of these "pro-life" people have more exceptions to their abortion beliefs than a legal disclaimer at a used car dealership.)

I consider myself "anti-abortion." Or, I could be considered "pro-innocent life."

I believe abortion kills children, and I am opposed to it. On the other hand, I vigorously support the death penalty. So I can see why some would not believe I am "pro-life."

28 posted on 03/04/2004 12:15:30 PM PST by Iron Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
I think we need bumper-stickers which state: "Pro-Choice Republican: I don't care how many of their own babies the Democrats kill."

I understand the sentiment, but can't agree. Babies are innocent and in need of protection, ESPECIALLY from democrats.

29 posted on 03/04/2004 5:45:02 PM PST by GLDNGUN (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MrB
The first thing you have to do is stop referring to him/her as "liberal" because he's not. He's a leftist. I've found that making this distinction really ticks them off.

He gets offended when someone refers to him as a "radical". I guess in his mind it's not "radical" to want to kill as many babies as possible.

30 posted on 03/04/2004 5:47:08 PM PST by GLDNGUN (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jwalburg
Sort of like "estate" tax and "death" tax? Liberals prefer the former and conservatives the latter.
31 posted on 03/04/2004 5:51:24 PM PST by joonbug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Here's a better change -

'PRO LIFE' to 'ANTI-CHILD KILLER'
32 posted on 03/04/2004 5:59:16 PM PST by airborne (lead by example)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Eagle
I'm against abortion and for the death penalty, but also against euthanasia and cloning. So "pro-life" still describes me. The fact that I don't want brutal killers out killing others means I'm pro-life, too.
33 posted on 03/04/2004 6:02:55 PM PST by jwalburg (We CAN Question their Patriotism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: jwalburg
Didn't you do the same thing with your use of pro-abortion rather than pro-choice?
34 posted on 03/04/2004 6:03:07 PM PST by CalKat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CalKat
The same thing as what?
35 posted on 03/04/2004 6:04:41 PM PST by jwalburg (We CAN Question their Patriotism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dmz
Because there is no such right. The AP should be neutral as long as about 80% of Americans oppose about 90% of all abortions that are actually done in the U.S.
36 posted on 03/04/2004 8:49:51 PM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CalKat
Didn't you do the same thing with your use of pro-abortion rather than pro-choice?

Except that "pro-abortion" is true.

When Bush cut funding to the UNFPA (because of their record of funding forced abortions in China) and moved the money to other family planning programs, the abortion lobby had a cow. They called him every name in the book. Now, if they're so interested in "choice," why did they want taxpayer dollars to end up helping forced abortions and sterilization?

37 posted on 03/08/2004 12:50:49 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Pre-empt the third murder attempt-- Pray for Terry Schiavo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DakotaGator
My vote is for "baby killers"!

I'll go with 'infanticidal maniacs.'

38 posted on 03/08/2004 12:59:23 PM PST by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Unfortunately, the threat of "I'll stop subscribing to your newspaper" is empty now, since all decent people have already stopped taking it. They've called to say they're going to give us free papers for one week, at which point I've gone ballistic and shouted that if I even SEE one of their rags in my driveway they'll be sued. Haven't seen one yet.

Our preacher's daughter's bumber sticker: Save the baby humans
39 posted on 03/08/2004 1:06:24 PM PST by MayflowerMadam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson