NBCs Unsubtle Slant On Abortio NBC’S UNSUBTLE SLANT ON ABORTION By Cal Thomas

From the opening scene of NBC’s movie “Roe vs. Wade” to Tom Brokaw’s labeling to two of his guests on an NBC News program as “antiabortion,” instead of “pro-life” as they asked to be called (the other guests were labeled “pro-choice” in accordance with their wishes), America’s No. 1 network engaged in a subtle, systematic, and coordinated propaganda campaign.

Anyone who believes the airing of this film at a time when the Supreme Court is considering a case that could limit or overturn abortion on demand is pure coincidence is a potential customer for a bridge in Brooklyn.

In the film the viewer was carefully led through all of the proabortion arguments. Ellen Russell, the character who represented Norma McCorvey (a.k.a. Jane Roe), said, “I got no place to go. I can’t give up another baby. What could it possibly be like to have a kid out there gettin’ his butt kicked and you don’t even know?”

That there were places for unwed mothers to go for care in 1972 was never mentioned.

Was it coincidental that the first commercial, for Maxwell House coffee, featured Linda Ellerbee, who marched in last month’s abortion rights demonstration in Washington and who does pro-abortion commentaries on Cable News Network, where she is employed?

The film shifted the focus of attention from the baby to the woman, a strategy that is at the heart of the pro-abortion position. Such a shift is necessary because pro-abortionists have lost the debate over the “humanness” of the baby thanks to ultrasound and fetoscopy, which show clearly fetal development.

The film treated adoption as a less appealing option than abortion, twisting logic and promoting the pro-abortion position that it is more blessed to kill the unborn than it is to enhance three lives, that of the baby, and the couple who desperately want children.

The actress playing the attorney Sarah Weddington said to her client, “You shouldn’t have to bear a child and give it to strangers.” This is harsh news to the long waiting list of those “strangers,” prospective adoptive parents who are hoping that women will indeed give their babies life in order that the lives of barren couples might be enhanced.

There were not-too-subtle references in the film to abortion as a cure-all for welfare (a suggestion that Jesse Jackson once denounced as racist before he converted to the pro-abortion view), and there were passing scenes of a dirty abortion table, “intolerant” religion (the Methodist denomination, favoring abortion, received an honorable mention), and insensitive men (except the ones helping the pro-abortion side.)

But it was in the hour-long NBC News special following the film that the NBC point of view was stripped of whatever objective clothing remained. (On the Washington, D.C., NBC affiliate, a local reporter covering pro-lifers as they watched the movie referred to them as “socalled pro-lifers,” while the reporter covering the other side called them “pro-choice.”)

With body language, smirks and interruptions, Tom Brokaw quickly revealed his side. Brokaw frequently interrupted and lectured Rep. Chris Smith, a Republican from New Jersey, and Olivia Gans of National Right to Life, while allowing Planned Parenthood President Faye Wattleton and author Anna Quindlen to make lengthy uninterrupted responses to questions.

This film and follow-up news program practiced censorship by ignoring the following: a woman deciding not to have an abortion for the baby’s sake;

people praying about their circumstances (millions do) and receiving counseling and financial help; a crisis pregnancy center (there are hundreds) helping a woman with an unplanned pregnancy before and after the birth of her child, offering her a place to live, food, clothing, medical care and even a job; pictures of what is being aborted, before and after the fact;

interviews with “tough cases” who were not aborted and who are asked whether they wish they had been; interviews with doctors, such as Bernard Nathanson, who used to perform abortions but have “converted” to the pro-life side; interviews with parents whose joy is boundless since they adopted a child.

The pro-abortionists have mounted an unprecedented campaign on radio and television and in newspapers and magazines, hoping to persuade the Supreme Court to leave Roe vs. Wade alone. They are spending millions. Pro-lifers are spending their smaller resources on saving babies.

Who will succeed? No one can be sure. But the verdict is already in from NBC, which has placed itself firmly on the side of death.

(c) 1989 Los Angeles Times Syndicate