Talk:NPR controversies/Archive 2

Sections unnecessarily lengthy?
The Juan Williams and Ronald/Vivian Schiller entries seem excessively long. With detailed recaps of who said what when, more newspaper style than WP format as far as I can tell. Anyone agree? Can we cut these down to a more consistent length? The Schiller/Schiller items seem especially well covered over at this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe. Perhaps we could do a "see more"? What do you think? --JohnMorse73 (talk) 18:39, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Propose adding Abortion terms as a Euphemism
I propose adding the following section:

NPR has a long-standing practice of instructing journalists which words to use and which to avoid when discussing abortion. NPR suggests replacing the terms "partial-birth abortion", "abortion clinic", "unborn baby", and " pro-life" with "intact dilation and extraction", "medical or health clinic that performs abortion", "fetus, and "abortion rights opponents" respectively. They also instruct journalists to not use the terms "fetal heartbeat" and "pro-abortion rights" but that "anti-abortion rights" is acceptable to use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dy3o2 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * "Intact dilation and extraction" is the appropriate medical term for the procedure, reproductive clinics generally offer many services other than abortion, "fetus" is also the appropriate medical term, and "pro-life" is itself a euphemism, and a misleading one at that - there are lots of "pro-life" people who are in favor of government-sanctioned wars and premeditated killings. Incidentally, "pro-choice" is also a euphemism, so the appropriate neutral terminology is indeed to state that someone is either a supporter or an opponent of abortion rights. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:14, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * after consideration, I'm with you on the intact dilation vs partial birth abortion phrasing. as partial birth abortion is more politically charged. fetal heartbeat is the appropriate medical term and discouragement of use is clearly meant to imply the unborn baby is not human. and although fetus is a proper medical term, unborn baby or baby is a commonly used, accepted phrase, much how undocumented immigrant, thought not a legal term, is a commonly used phrase in the illegal immigration debate. Dy3o2 (talk) 15:40, 4 June 2019 (UTC)


 * "Fetal heartbeat" is generally incorrect, at least in relation to any of the legislative bills in the United States. A pulse is first detectable when still in the embryonic stage, generally around 6 weeks, while the term "fetus" is medically used starting around 8-10 weeks. Also, the embryo has not developed a heart yet, and so the appropriate term is "embryonic cardiac activity". I would suggest you may want to do some research into the terms you are incorrectly calling "euphemisms" in order to understand why they are all actually the appropriate medical terms and/or the least political forms of discussing these issues. Otherwise, your comments come off slightly as WP:SOAP. Please take care. Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 23:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)