By Dave Andrusko
You understand why they say it, of course, but when pro-abortion ideologues crank out an abortion documentary, they really oughtn’t to pretend that they are going to be even marginally fair to the pro-life perspective.
Last Wednesday we posted about a forthcoming documentary aired on Netflix titled “Reversing Roe.” One of the very positive reviews came from Ben Kenigsburg. Writing for the New York Times, he said, “While there’s no doubt that the film has been made from a pro-abortion-rights perspective, it gives voice to other points of view.”
So how’d that work out? Over at Newsbusters, Katie Yoder demolishes the notion that Netflix had told “the whole story.”
A Netflix press release high-fived the documentary’s filmmakers Ricki Stern and Annie Sundberg for “offer[ing] candid and riveting interviews with key figures from both sides of the divide” while staying “unflinching in its commitment to telling the whole story.” Indeed, as Yoder noted, “[I]n multiple interviews, filmmakers Ricki Stern and Annie Sundberg, said they were ‘looking to tell both sides.’”
That didn’t happen. In the film, MRC [Media Research Center] counted 13 women interviewed who support abortion in some way, but only one interview with a pro-life woman. Overall, the film featured more than twice as many abortion supporters as pro-lifers.
It didn’t have to be that way. Five pro-life women leaders publicly confirmed to MRC that they were interviewed for the film, but don’t appear in the final cut of Reversing Roe. …
In other words, the filmmakers had every opportunity to tell “both sides.” They interviewed multiple pro-life women for hours – some for days – but none of them made the film except one (National Right to Life President Carol Tobias).
Let me conclude by quoting from last week’s post. It proved to be telling.
Writing for the Hollywood Reporter, Katie Kilkenny breathlessly tells us that “Abortion-Themed Films Take on Greater Urgency amid Kavanaugh Hearings.”
For Ms. Kilkenny, the documentary was already essentially flawless but it was made even better because Stern and Sundberg “raced to change their Netflix film’s ending after [Supreme Court Justice Anthony] Kennedy said he would leave the court in July.” Kilkenny paraphrases Stern to say that “While abortion is an extremely divisive issue among lawmakers, recent polls have shown that the majority of Americans oppose reversing Roe v. Wade.” Then, the clincher:
“Our hope is that people will watch the film and become active in their own way, whatever that is. And to get people out to vote, which is always a challenge in the United States, so we can really reflect what the average American person believes, not what a small voting majority believes,” she says.
Get it? There really is a pro-abortion consensus among the populous that politicians don’t understand. Stern hopes that “Reversing Roe” will motivate what you might call the Real Majority.
Of course that is utter nonsense, the same pro-abortion spiel we’ve heard since Roe v. Wade—and before, come to think of it.
Hollywood wants us to believe this propaganda.
Fat chance of that.