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

To: Rudder
You have incorrectly assessed my stand on this matter.

And you have replied, to the only part of my post that wasn't a direct question, but my opinion; which is based on your attacking the pro-life organization, and defending the murderers. Based purely on your post, what other conclusion could I have drawn???

And, you still haven't answered my questions, which of course is your right. But, it is also my right to ask you 'why?'

54 posted on 07/23/2008 5:32:38 AM PDT by Turret Gunner A20 (If the opposite of Pro is Con, what is the opposite of Progress? -- Tom Glennon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: Turret Gunner A20
Well, I did post my intention in criticizing this so-called news site earlier in this thread. But, here it goes again.

In this particular piece, it states that Planned Parenthood took an action because of the new law. The report did not give any response from PP. That is unseemly at best and likely yellow journalism. This practice undermines the credibility of LifeNews.

I have been following LifeNews for about a year and it seems this practice characterizes the style of this publication. They do not have to do this, especially if they want to reach beyond members of the choir. It would have been better to at least give the titular response from PP. The point would have been conveyed and LifeNews' credibility would be intact.

56 posted on 07/23/2008 5:29:40 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

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