The pre-trial gag order might have had something to do with it. (All bolding added by me.)
So: Liberals covered Gosnell when the story broke. A gag order effectively snuffed out media coverage
of the case for two years. But when the trial began, it didn't break into the MSM the way all manner of random murder or fraud trials have. If this does start to captivate the MSM, it probably won't get covered or analyzed the way conservatives prefer. A more sane and responsible system of inspections
could have nabbed Gosnell without any change whatsoever to abortion law.
Kermit Gosnell: The Alleged Mass-Murderer and the Bored Media
Gosnell was charged, and magazines like Slate wrote about the charges at the time. He's accused of performing illegal abortions. In Pennsylvania, an abortion after the 24th week of pregnancy is only legal if a physician proves it was necessary to "preserve life of mother or prevent serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of bodily function." Gosnell didn't do that.
But there is a political scandal here. Grand jury investigators were baffled: How did Gosnell's clinic, an infamous place in the tri-state area, go un-inspected for so long? Basically, the regulators blew it. "Even though the first DOH Certificate of Approval for Gosnell's clinic expired on December 20, 1980," write the investigators, "the next documented site review was not conducted until August 1989." After a 1992 visit, regulators reported that the clinic was wheelchair-accessible, even though it's "multi-leveled and has no elevator." After 1993, the state didn't follow up complaints about the clinic.
If you're pro-choice, say, and you worry that the Gosnell story is being promoted only to weaken your cause, you really should read that grand jury report. "DOH could and should have closed down Gosnell's clinic years before," write the investigators. Why wasn't it? Were state regulators nervous about igniting a political fight about abortion? Is the regulatory system incompetent or under-funded? And are there other states where the same could be said? Social conservatives are largely right about the Gosnell story. Maybe it's not a raw political story. It's just the story of a potential mass murderer who operated for decades as government regulators did nothing.
Social conservatives should probably be a bit cautious about flogging this story ... Gosnell was performing procedures that were already illegal
under PA law. His "practice" as a modern-day back room abortionist is exactly why this is a life and death issue for reproductive rights activists.
The piece quoted above asks an interesting question: why wasn't the clinic shut down?
And, to echo the OP ... where was the conservative outrage over the exploitation and murder of those (poor and minority) women? Too busy passing state laws all over the country to make even more
procedures illegal because parking lots are too small or women balk at bogus transvaginal ultrasounds?
There is no Gosnell coverup - Salon.com
No, they aren't right about the Gosnell story. If you've never heard of the Gosnell story, it's not because of a coverup by the liberal mainstream media. It's probably because you failed to pay attention to the copious coverage
among pro-choice and feminist journalists
, as well as the big news organizations, when the news first broke in 2011. There would be something rich, if it weren't so infuriating, about these (almost uniformly male, as it happens) reporters and commentators scrambling to break open this shocking untold story. You know, the one that was written about here
, to name some disparate sources.
If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would be making the argument that there was a conservative
cover-up to hide the real-life consequences of their crusade against reproductive rights.