Montana Assisted Suicide Advocate Made Up Quote by Plaintiff

The media usually report the assisted suicide agenda by, basically, printing the proponents' press releases and pretending that it is objective news. But sometimes, it comes back to bite them, as when the PR is mendacious.
Case in point: When a Montana judge legalized assisted suicide, the stories all contained a statement by the plaintiff in the case praising the ruling. The only problem is that the plaintiff died before the ruling came out. That required a low key correction: In a Dec. 6 story about a court ruling that doctor-assisted suicides are legal in Montana, The Associated Press erroneously reported that terminally ill plaintiff Robert Baxter said in a statement that he was comforted by the ruling. Baxter died Friday night and had been unaware of the decision issued Friday, according to his family. Anticipating the court decision, Hopcraft Communications prepared a release for Compassion & Choices, a patients' rights group, and included a statement attributed to Baxter and approved by him, Steve Hopcraft said. He said the firm believed Baxter was living and able to communicate when the release was issued.
In other words the PR group made up the reaction. But not to worry. The next time the same group releases a pro assisted suicide press release, it will be dutifully reported. The media don't care when they are deceived by people with whom they agree.


2 Comments:
BALONEYBALONEYBALONEYBALONEYBALONEYBALONEYBALONEYBALONEYBALNEYBALONEYBALONEYBALONEY IS RIGHT!!!
They could have gotten his statement and approval in advance, in the event that the ruling was as desired, but if he was that close to death, and it couldn't have been assisted suicide if the ruling, which he might have wanted to live to hear, wasn't made yet, was he able to express an opinion about, and "approve," a ruling?
Did he ever even know he was a plaintiff?
They need a PR firm...what a concept. A lot of people must have donated money so that they could pay the PR firm, not to mention other things. People who want to "ensure" that they'll be able to "control their own death" one day, and who "believe" that they are "helping" others. Imagine paying for someone else to be able to die...and for others to end up dead against their will. If one is going to donate to a cause, to "help" others, are the "beneficiaries" here the most truly needy people, is this the most pressingly urgent cause? How does it improve the world?
Imagine the answers they can give to that last question...
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home