Signing of Unborn Victims of Violence Act Receives More Balanced Coverage.

The signing of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (UVVA) was not only long overdue and exciting for the families of victims, but it also represented clear evidence that our nation is gradually recognizing that when a pregnant mother is brutally attacked, her unborn child is a second victim.

Yet from many years of experience, I've learned that even when the moral rightness of a piece of legislation is plain to see, the media will often present the debate in such a way that the pro-life side's perspective is belittled or treated as less important. In the past, we've had to argue with bookers and producers of television programs to get our people on newscasts, to be able to use fetal models, or to even have reporters use neutral language.

For readily apparent reasons, I was not going to hold my breath in anticipation of news coverage of the signing of the UVVA which took place April 1. To my astonishment, overall, the coverage was pretty good.

Three cable networks, CNN, Fox News Channel and MSNBC, provided live coverage of the signing in the East Room of the White House. The Chyrons that scrolled across the bottom of the screen - - the names of people and the tidbits of information that add details to the news story - - were descriptive and informative without being either overtly sympathetic or overtly hostile. There was all that we ever ask for: balance.

On the networks, ABC and NBC each ran a short segment. CBS ignored the event, but had called NRLC's Media Relations department earlier in the day. They told one staffer that the newsworthiness of the event surprised them and they were scrambling to try to put something together. Poor planning apparently lead to poor coverage on CBS.

Even the notoriously hostile Peter Jennings of ABC's World News Tonight played it down the middle. "The bill's supporters invoked the murder of a pregnant California woman, Laci Peterson, to build support for the law. Her mother and stepfather attended today's ceremony, and Mr. Bush said there clearly were two deaths in this particular case."

The White House Bulletin, reported that the Washington Times, several local stations, and the wire services all mentioned that John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, voted against the bill. The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the networks chose not to mention Kerry's vote, a glaring omission considering that his rival, pro-life President George W. Bush, had actively promoted the measure.