Here’s another example of a reporter injecting his own bias into a story. This is from a Reuters wire story on the House of Representatives passing a bill banning cloning.
- At issue is the confusing and often emotional debate over whether a ball of cells created in a lab dish is a human life or merely human tissue. The scientific community and patient advocates say while cloning does create an embryo, it has no chance of ever becoming a baby. The cluster of cells could be a source of embryonic stem cells—cells that have the potential to regenerate any tissue or any organ in the body. Religious and anti-abortion groups, and many politicians, argue that each cell cluster is a human life and should not be subjected to experimentation.
Notice, they call it a “confusing and often emotional debate.” It’s not confusing for some of us. We know that that “ball of cells” is a human being, just like the very large “ball of cells” writing the news story. And the only reason the embryo has chance of becoming a baby is because they have designed it that way, because they prevent it. Also the reporter contrasts the questionable promises of embryonic stem cell research (“it could happen”) with the objections of pro-lifers who “argue” that the embryos (now known by the even more demeaning and inaccurate term of “cell cluster”) are human life. And we know that “argue” is not as sure as “could.”
It’s important to read these news reports with an eye toward the biases injected by the reporters.
