2016 March for Life: Lack of Reporting Begs the Question

January 22nd marked the forty-second annual March for Life rally in Washington D.C. since the protest’s humble beginnings in 1974, following the Roe v. Wade case. However, there was hardly any media coverage publicizing the event that many deem the largest pro-life event in the world. The few articles written on the matter seemed simply to discuss the resilience of the protesters in the frigid temperatures that Friday, rather than the issue of the rally itself. It seems that there was little concern given to the purpose of the March or its impact in general. This begs the question of why proper coverage of the event was neglected, but more importantly what this neglect means for Marches yet to come.
To reemphasize its purpose, the March for Life is a peaceful demonstration that happens every year in the month of January within the vicinity of Washington D.C. Specifically, the purpose for this demonstration is to protest against the pro-abortion laws established following the Roe v. Wade case, which many of the protesters deem unjust. As in previous years, that Friday’s march began with a rally in front of the Washington Monument followed by a procession through adjacent street ways. This year’s rally hosted thirteen influential speakers, ranging from Super Bowl Champion Matt Birk to President Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List; all speaking for the pro-life cause. The processions that followed included periods of chanting, singing, and prayer. Almost every hand firmly held its own picket, sign, or balloon, advocating for the pro-life cause.
What makes the national March for Life particularly interesting and the matter newsworthy, are the number of individuals who participate in and support the March, especially the number of youth involved. From its conception, the demonstration has always brought out participants from all over the country in the hundreds. And it seems like support for the pro-life cause has increased with the passing of each year. According to Gallup.com, in 2012, 50% of Americans identified themselves as pro-life, whereas Americans who saw themselves as pro-choice dropped to a record low of just 41% that year. Since then, the support for the pro-life side of the debate seems to have increased as the rate of abortions done in the United States has significantly dropped by 5%. Where the youth is concerned, many of those who support the pro-life position now are teenagers and young adults still in school.
Nevertheless, media coverage is still lacking when it comes to giving such functions as the March for Life their due. One may conclude that the reason for such neglect is due to the unpopularity of discussing a topic as divisive as abortion. However, it could also be due to the solemnity of abortion, a practice too serious to debate upon in the reserved culture we have been conditioned to abide by. As much as Americans uncomfortable when death comes into a conversation, the same feelings often arise in regard to abortion. Whatever the case is, though, pro-lifers can rest assured that the March for Life will live on. Its enthusiastic rallying has persisted for forty-two years, and will likely continue until there is legislative progress. The lack of media coverage surely will neither stop nor slow down the March for Life’s goal to protect the unborn.