The work of journalists becomes laughably poor when there is scarce objectivity to their writing, combined with excessive ideology. The following tale should be an embarrassment to any journalist associated with the story, given the very poor quality of their work.
The Guardian newspaper is known to have very strong support of abortion in its reporting. Some even say that they are the media and PR arm of the abortion industry.
I’m phoned one day by Sarah Ditum, who aggressively shouts at me down the telephone and tells me that apparently, one of the pro-lifers has turned up with a camera at our prayer vigil and has started filming women entering the clinic. Sarah Ditum must be a friend of Ann Furedi, given she is invited to speak at the BPAS debate on abortion with Ann, during which she said she wished she aborted her own child who was already born. Sadly for Sarah, late term infanticide is not legal yet in Britain. So, after erroneously accusing us of harassment and intimidation, Sarah writes the most inflammatory piece she possibly can to discredit and mischaracterise the peaceful and prayerful pro-life presence outside her friend’s abortuary. Sarah’s article is so inaccurate it’s clearly libellous, with fictitious stories of women being “encircled” and tales of bullying.
Her article causes a large number of real journalists to turn up at our prayer vigil, who immediately are tremendously disappointed not to have discovered the British wing of the Westborough Baptist Church and leave straight away without a story. But the BBC take up the story and I calmly and clearly explain the peaceful and prayerful nature of prayer vigils, while Ann Furedi continues the trend of mischaracterising the essence of our prayer vigils on the radio.
Ann Furedi tells me to “take your love somewhere else.” This is fantastic advice, and since that point I’ve taken that love to 11 other countries, including Russia, Australia, Brazil and South Africa. I must return to Ann for more nuggets of wisdom in the near future.
Sarah’s article can only be described as doubly ironic. First, pro-lifers don’t and never film and harass women entering abortion clinics and never have. But BPAS film all their clients entering the abortion centre all the time. We don’t film people, we pray. The second irony is that no woman is harassed or intimidated considering abortion from pro-lifers, the only harassment is towards pro-lifers.
What ensured next was what is called a “Twitter storm” in which parts of the liberal establishment write all kinds of profanities and unpleasantries towards you on the internet, egged on and encouraged by Ben Goldacre and pals.
The next person to visit is Sunny Hundal, of the Liberal Conspiracy blog. As Clare Mulvany has pointed out, Sunny comes along and films outside of the abortion centre – precisely the crime that we were accused of! The hypocrisy is laughable and he quickly takes the video off the internet.
Next up is a Guardian video as an attempt of ‘undercover journalism’ to discredit the work of 40 Days for Life. But it goes comically wrong as there is nothing to uncover, and they end up promoting a pro-life message instead. The video is entitled, “What my mum fought for is being threatened.” I didn’t have the heart to tell the author of this piece that if her mother used her ‘rights’ that she fought for, she wouldn’t exist.
So the Guardian decides it’s time to start fundraising against 40 Days for Life, as an attempt to discourage people from praying. James Bell writes to get people to donate to BPAS. But BPAS don’t need money as they already receive millions of pounds of taxpayers money from the Government. The development is particularly encouraging as it means that prayers are having an effect on the abortion business. A pro-lifers raise double campaign on the back of James’ call helps to raise over £25,000 for pro-life efforts for a local pro-life group. Thanks James!
So the Guardian start campaigning for a large public protest against 40 Days for Life when the Bishop will visit our vigil. They even use the front page of their ‘newspaper’ in an attempt to get the message out. Even with the support of a national newspaper, only a few hundred people turn up. But the dynamic tension the Guardian creates allows us to get hundreds of people to the prayer vigil, a record number and more than any before.
By this time, the furore that the Guardian have created out of nothing has led to a bunch of students shouting death threats at some of our volunteers and insulting Priests in the most offensive ways possible. At the same time the liberal intelligentsia have sent us the ultimate compliment. Imitation and plagiarism are the most sincere forms of flattery. A ’40 Days for Choice’ campaign is the next most innovative creation. Genius!
But the record for incompetence must go to Holly Baxter, who on 26 March 2013, writes an article with 17 factual inaccuracies in one article. I have yet to contact the Guinness Book of Records to see whether this is a record for incompetent journalism, as it is quite difficult to write an article intentionally with so many inaccuracies.
Naturally the Guardian failed to report the story when the BPAS abortion centre in Bedford Square closed, a situation the newspaper probably helped to create more than anyone else.
Alan Rushbridger is the editor of the Guardian. His newspaper has cleared produced laughable campaigning masquerading as journalism. I don’t believe in suing for libel, but if I did, I would have a field day. I forgive him for producing such weak journalism, but the babies who have died at abortuaries thanks to his journalism can’t forgive, because they are already dead.
The loss making nature of British newspapers means that institutions like the Guardian are unlikely to be around for much longer.