News without truth

News depends on sources, but not every source is necessarily credible. That distinction seems to be missing in ‘news’ being relayed to the public.

There’s one particular source that has decided to latch on to a cause (because he can) and then use it to make demands based on irrational arguments that are insulting to anyone who has more than one brain cell.

The source needs no introduction – Paul Vincenti’s ‘Gift of Life’. The reason why Paul Vincenti and his crusaders don’t need an introduction is because the media has given them more space than they deserve. When the media recycles unreliable claims without first checking the facts, it leads to misinformation.

Paul Vincenti was in the The Times again last Saturday, “urging Malta’s representatives on the Council of Europe to adhere to Malta’s pro-life stand and work to oppose a resolution aimed at facilitating access to abortion”.

It is actually about ‘Women’s Access to Lawful Medical Care’, but not in Paul Vincenti’s eyes.

The coverage of the GOL statement did not include any information on the details of the resolution other than what Paul Vincenti chose to tell the public. Readers got his version of the truth rather than facts.

The resolution, which is to be discussed and voted on in October, aims to regulate the practice of conscientious objection in the field of health care, which arises when health care professionals refuse to provide certain services based on religious, moral or philosophical objections.

The resolution emphasizes the need to balance the right of conscientious objection with the responsibility of the profession and the right of each patient to access lawful medical care in a timely manner.

GOL’s objection stated: “We are particularly concerned with the fact that this report stands on the biased assertion that practices like abortion and euthanasia are a form of healthcare and a human right. It, therefore, implies and promotes them as fundamental rights and a regular form of healthcare that should be regulated like any other medical service.”

Paul Vincenti has the audacity to talk of “bias”. Here’s what he said when the ‘Make Noise for Free Choice Campaign’ took off in the EU in July last year: “it could inspire Maltese liberals to start calling for abortion and this would create political pressure”.

If he’s the one creating political pressure, that’s fine. Not the ‘liberals’… never.

His bias conveniently ignores statistics that reveal that each year, 20 million abortions take place in unsafe conditions – that happens mostly in countries where women are denied abortion.

The World Health Organisation estimates that unsafe abortions result in 67,000 deaths annually. Reproductive health problems remain the leading cause of ill health and death for women of childbearing age worldwide, according to the United Nations Population Fund.

The other side of the story is conveniently forgotten when the argument is in line with popular belief, whether true or false. There is no way any individual making such pitiful arguments in favour of abortion would be welcomed by the media – it would be tough even if the individual were a seasoned debater.

This is an example of Paul Vincenti’s advice to the nation: “Those who argue for the absolute, unlimited right of choice of the individual actually end up destroying the very individual they are out to defend for each individual life is very much like a cell in a living organism”.

Seriously, did anybody actually read that before publishing it?

Thanks to some media’s unquestioning coverage of his meaningless statements, he has now taken it upon himself to counter “anti-family opinions” in the media by those who favour divorce.

In his eyes, divorce, abortion and euthanasia are “linked”. So now, he’s also rallying pro-family supporters to speak their mind against divorce in order “to protect Malta from societal suicide”.

Then he proceeds to talk about the merits of collectivism over individualism through definitions copied and pasted from Wikipedia. Seriously.

This is what he writes of individualism: “Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy ¬ideology, or social outlook that stresses the moral worth of the individual…” It goes on. Check Wikipedia.

This is what he preaches about collectivism: “Collectivism, on the other hand, emphasises the interdependence of every human in some collective group and the ¬priority of group goals over individual goals...” There’s more. See Wikipedia.

Paul Vincenti is making an argument against divorce based on notions he doesn’t even understand so he needs to look them up. He’s not delving into scholarly articles on the subject. He doesn’t need to because the media doesn’t even notice he’s plagiarising from the most obvious source on the Internet.

He’s on TV at prime time, his views are aired on the radio and he’s given space in newspapers. The media continues to recycle his unreliable claims. It sheds light on their bias towards the political and moral beliefs of the most powerful groups in society.

There are some in society who have reached the age of reason and would very much appreciate knowing facts over values

Via CarolineMuscat.com