Are the Anti-Planned Parenthood Smear Videos... Investigative Journalism?
These serious, but hyperbolically-stated, charges are based largely on short, manipulatively edited videos produced from hidden camera conversations by the anti-abortion group, Center for Medical Progress (CMP), led by founder David Daleiden who previously served as Director of Research for similar group, Live Action. The videos are being used to justify official investigations by Congress and efforts to bar Planned Parenthood from receiving state and federal funds for routine health care services such as breast cancer screenings, pap smears, contraception, and prenatal care. Federal funds are not used to provide abortion care (except via Medicaid in the cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother), and many Planned Parenthood affiliates do not even provide abortions. Among those that do, not all are involved in the donation of fetal tissue and organs. This is the case in New Hampshire, where, in response to the CMP's videos, the state recently decided not to continue contracting with Planned Parenthood to provide health care services, even though PP is not engaged in fetal tissue research donations and the state Attorney General had already decided that there was no basis for an investigation. "We do not launch investigations in the state of New Hampshire on rumor," said Governor Maggie Hassan. "We do not launch criminal investigations in the state of New Hampshire because somebody edits a tape." The videos claiming to demonstrate that Planned Parenthood sells fetal tissue and organs for profit actually only show exactly what PPFA says it does. The organization is reimbursed for the costs associated with transporting tissue for purposes of medical and scientific research. Medical ethicists say that the reimbursement rates discussed in the videos are well within the standard range for non-profits. (For-profit medical enterprises get more.) This is all legal under federal law. And it is worth noting that no one is proposing changing the laws, or investigating anyone other than Planned Parenthood--likely because the research is life-saving and has led to breakthroughs in cancer treatments and other medical advancements. This isn't the first time anti-choice groups have used the same methods to smear Planned Parenthood and pressure public officials into investigating the women's health care provider in search of a justification to make PPFA ineligible to receive federal funds on the same basis as everyone else. (They call it "defunding Planned Parenthood.") David Daleiden himself served as Director of Research for Live Action during the big smear campaign against PPFA in 2011. Vickie Saporta of the National Abortion Federation (the professional association of abortion providers, whose membership includes providers in both the non-profit and for-profit medical community), further connected the dots to a similar effort in the 1990s. She recently wrote in The Washington Examiner that
"In 1999, another anti-abortion group, Life Dynamics, released an `undercover' video claiming that abortion providers were profiting from fetal tissue donation. The allegations led to a congressional hearing in which the star witness confessed to having been paid over $20,000 by Life Dynamics. The swirl of charges and countercharges can make your head spin, so here is one simple example of the way CMP handles evidence. Daleiden was recently interviewed by Alisyn Camerota on CNN's "New Day" show. He said a brochure for StemExpress, a small company that procures human tissues for researchers, proved that Planned Parenthood harvests fetal parts for profit. He urged viewers to visit the CMP web site to see it. So I did. What CMP posted is a generic corporate promotional brochure aimed at a wide audience in the medical field. A PPFA official's endorsement on the brochure is for the professionalism of the company and makes no mention of pecuniary interests. One of the most remarkable aspects of the current controversy is that few journalists and public officials are seriously scrutinizing this crude propaganda, and are largely allowing an obscure, militant anti-abortion group to cast themselves as investigative journalists rather than highlighting their agenda and dishonest tactics. Daleiden claims to produce investigative journalism and his lawyers (the Christian Right's American Center for Law and Justice) characterize Daleiden and his CMP colleague Troy Newman (who also leads the militant anti-abortion group Operation Rescue) as "investigative journalists." Christianity Today, the major magazine of evangelical Christianity, called Daleiden a "filmmaker." These are very generous descriptions of who these men are, and what they do. Recently the National Abortion Federation obtained a temporary injunction against the Center for Medical Progress, preventing it from publishing confidential material obtained under false pretenses. Among the reasons the injunction was granted are the harassment and death threats against the PPFA staffers who appeared in the videos. In his ruling, Judge William H. Orrick said:
"Critically, the parties do not disagree about NAF's central allegations: defendants assumed false identities, created a fake company, and lied to NAF in order to obtain access to NAF's annual meetings and gain private information about its members....[The defendants] unquestionably breached their agreements with NAF...The evidence presented by NAF, including that defendants' recent dissemination of videos of and conversations with NAF affiliates has led to harassment and death threats for the individuals in those videos, is sufficient to show irreparable injury for the purposes of the temporary restraining order." Center for Medical Progress responded: "The National Abortion Federation is a criminal organization that has spent years conspiring with Planned Parenthood on how to violate federal laws on partial-birth abortion and fetal tissue sales." The evidence for this series of charges from CMP? None.
Crossposted from Eyes Right, the blog of Political Research Associates
Are the Anti-Planned Parenthood Smear Videos... Investigative Journalism? | 2 comments (2 topical, 0 hidden)
Are the Anti-Planned Parenthood Smear Videos... Investigative Journalism? | 2 comments (2 topical, 0 hidden)
|
||||||||||||
|