My Sources

I have gathered many sources for my project, here are the most helpful ones in understanding the event. Analyzing them will help me get the best handle on my project.

Cooper, Charlotte. "I Stand With Planned Parenthood" 2/26/2011, via wikimedia commons. CC 2.0 License

1. Anti-Abortion Group Accuses Planned Parenthood of Selling Fetal Organs

• The source comes from U.S. News and World Report, a credible outlet for online news. 

• The author is Kimberly Leonard, a health care reporter. Prior to US News, she worked for Health Rankings as a multimedia producer and reporter. She is experienced and graduated from the University of Richmond. Won the National Newsmaker award at CADCA.

• By observing her tweets and her articles, it's clear she is concerned with women's rights and may lean towards the left. 
• Probably sides with PP,  I think she gives a valid but a little biased story.

• The source came out the same day as the release of the footage by the CMP, so same day as my story I chose for my project. (Tuesday, July 14th, 2015) It was an immediate reaction to the controversy, and after Planned Parenthood made their countered response.

• This article is very useful. It introduced stakeholders: Eric Ferrero, Deborah Nucatola from PP, and David Daleiden (CMP). It gives Ferrero's, VP of Comm for PP, statement on the released footage from that day. It shows his defense. 

• This article is interesting because it still portrays PP in a good light and shows their defense, that the video is not only edited, but the CMP misconstrues the legal process of tissue/organ donations. 

• In this article, it is saying that tissue donation is common and not unethical, even after abortions, and there is always the consent of the patients. Although, CMP tries to make it seem like PP is involved in black market type of sales/illegal activity. CMP tries to appeal emotionally, piggybacking off of the fact that this is a monetary exchange which is the result of an abortion, so that's why it is "bad."

2. Undercover video catches Planned Parenthood selling aborted baby body parts

• This source comes from Life Site News, a "non-profit Internet service dedicated to issues of culture, life, and family. It was launched in September 1997," non-profits are not always credible. Also, this website is very opinionated. 

• The author is Ben Johnson, he is a "U.S. Bureau Chief of LifeSiteNews.com" and he is very evidently biased in his pieces. Also, he is not discreet on twitter with his political views- he is conservative.
• The source came out the morning of July 14th, same day as event. 

• This source is interesting because Johnson attaches Congress' contact info, pleading that people should sign a petition: "demanding that Congress stop Planned Parenthood's illegal and inhuman practice of harvesting, selling baby body parts"

• He links to Daleiden/CMP's website so he is relying on their information.
• This source is an example of an extreme, anti-abortion perspective that sides w CMP.
• Desires an investigation into PP, rather than people who want one on CMP.

3. Statement from Planned Parenthood on New Undercover Video

• Comes from official Planned Parenthood Federation of America's website. They are obviously going to defend themselves against the claims/footage made. 

• The author is not given, but the statement noted in this source is by Eric Ferrero, VP of Communications, Planned Parenthood, and there is a video attached that has Cecile Richards' official statement.

• It was published on July 14th, 2015, immediately following the video sting that day.

• This source is useful because it comes directly from the subject of the controversy, Planned Parenthood. It is their defense and explanation that attempts to keep their image intact for the world. 

• It is thorough, yet concise and shows how professional PP is by handling the situation maturely; they never even mention Daleiden's name in specific which I think is very strategic- 
• It demonstrates that they are in a higher position and are focused on explaining themselves.
• They are not pointing fingers at the people responsible for illegally filming them and deceiving the public because they are only concerned with themselves in this matter. 

• The video statement starts off by mentioning all the good things PP does/has to offer; and they only briefly mention that there is a group who tried to damage them.

4. Republican Presidential Contenders Slam Planned Parenthood Over Video

• This comes from Time.com. "Time has the world's largest circulation for a weekly news magazine, and has a readership of 25 million, 20 million of which are based in the United States." 

• The author is Maya Rhodan, a graduate of Howard University’s School of Communications. Based on her own website, I can tell she is very liberal. So although her piece is about conservatives reactions to the PP video, she probably is not supporting them.

• This piece was published on July 14th, same day as the video release by Daleiden. 

• This was in leu of Republican Presidential contenders commenting on the PP video-- Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, and Bobby Jindal are big names that happen to make negative remarks.

• This helps with my project because it shows the different impacts that the PP video aroused; not everyone came to PP's aid and defended them. Jindal, for example, directed health departments in Louisiana to investigate their own, local PP. 

• The fact that people with political power are publicly against PP causes a large blow to PP's image and consequences to their infrastructure. 

5. House Republicans to Investigate Planned Parenthood Over Fetal Tissue

• This is from The New York Times. Very reliable, but can have a liberal slant.

• Two authors. First is Jackie Calmes, ex- Whitehouse reporter, NYT national correspondent, pretty biased against conservatives. Second author is "Science journalist for @nytimes. Passionate about STEM diversity and global health" according to twitter bio. Was on NPR, and graduated from Cornell. Both are credible and lean to the left.

• The article came out July 15th, 2015. A day after the first video was released by Daleiden, and the same day (Wednesday) that the House Republicans announced there would be an investigation on PP. The tone seems to favor PP; authors call them "unsuspecting."

• Although PP says they never profit from the sales of fetal parts, that those are donated, and there is only a cost when it comes to transportation and processing, Republicans want to investigate...
• The investigation motive/incentive: end Planned Parenthood, boost conservative reputation and the pro-life ideology. *

• Introduced a new stakeholder: Lila Rose, leader of Live Action, the anti-abortion group Daleiden used to work for. NYT says that Rose promoted the footage released by CMP. 
• Republicans in the Gov't, specifically, are stakeholders.*

• Interesting that Daleiden and Ms. Rose did not respond to NYT, but responded to other medias like the Register (a catholic news source I reference in #7). 

6. Coincidence ... or Is It? Planned Parenthood ‘Sting’ Video Isn’t First to Derail Legislation

• From yahoo health on Yahoo.com, has become a credible news source.

• The author is Jennifer Gerson Uffalussy, one of the founding editors of Jezebel, graduated from Columbia, does freelance, specializes in feminism, Women's sexual and reproductive health and health policy. Likely to be biased on this matter.

• The source came out on July 16th, 2015, two days after the video release.

• Her article has brought new evidence/info to my attention. 
• Before the video was released on July 14th, congress was voting on a bill that would support the sale of a commemorative coin, (which would fund breast cancer research)  half of its funds would go to the Susan G. Komen organization; a proponent of Planned Parenthood who often gives them grants for women who want breast cancer screenings but cannot afford...

• Later in the day, after the video release.-- "the bill had 307 co-sponsors in Congress, including 142 Republicans. By Tuesday afternoon, following the release of the video, enough congressional Republicans had rescinded their support for the bill "
• Interesting that the video was released on the same day as the bill was being voted on.

• This article also provides instances of Lila Rose and Daleiden committing suspicious acts before the video footage investigation on PP

7. Why the Catholic Behind the Planned Parenthood Videos Went Undercover

• This source comes from the National Catholic Register- the oldest national catholic newspaper in the country. There are print issues as well as online articles. It "carries out the mission of service to the church." Going to have traditional, Catholic opinions, it will be biased.

• The author is Patti Armstrong. She has a B.A. in social work and an M.A. in public administration. She is publicly very religious on her own blog and twitter, her twitter bio states "pro-life" which is all I needed to see. Additionally, she tweeted: "#Prolifers! Help this hashtag trend: #IStandWithDavid '@DavidDaleiden' #PPSellsBabyParts"

• This source came out on 7/22/2015, 8 days after the event. The source had time to schedule and interview with David Daleiden. Also, it was published the day after the release of a second incriminating video of Planned Parenthood. 

• It was also the same day that David Daleiden posted on the CMP web page that Planned Parenthood and "political allies" were attacking him. This source was an effort to help David Daleiden when the public and the government was on to him.

• This source offers an interview with Daleiden, the head journalist and founder of CMP. It is simply an explanation that completely sides with Daleiden and portrays him as an innocent hero who went undercover in the name of Catholicism and justice. 

• This source is really great though because it is a completely different perspective from the more liberal stories, and it has a dialogue from Daleiden filled with details.

• It gave his background and what made him start the investigation and CMP. I definitely can get a lot out of this source. It also helped me discover new stakeholders: Theresa Deisher, Stemexpress (biotech company), Archbishop Charles Chaput (made statement for the Register article), Cecile Richards CEO of PP (not a new stakeholder). 

• Theresa Deisher supposedly trained Daleiden, president of Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute and CEO of AVM Biotechnology. Two companies that are against "the use of aborted babies in biomedical research."

8. StemExpress Granted Temporary Restraining Order Against Center for Medical Progress

• This is from StemExpress a biomedical research company, one of a few that Daleiden chose to target because of it's affiliation with Planned Parenthood. They took legal action against him.

• The company's site says: "Founded in 2010, StemExpress is the only company of its kind to procure tissues and isolate cells for researchers’ individual needs in its own labs."StemExpress’s human-tissue products range from healthy to diseased and fetal to adult." 

• StemExpress wrote the article, it was a statement published July 29th, 2015 in leu of Daleiden's illegal investigation (two videos released that week attempting to expose PP), and a day after they obtained a "TRO" against Daleiden and the CMP

• **That was on the 28th, the same day that CMP released the first episode in a new documentary web series... 

• the footage they released was also apart of "The “Human Capital” (project) documentary web series is produced by The Center for Medical Progress and integrates expert interviews, eyewitness accounts, and real-life undercover interactions to tell the story of Planned Parenthood’s commercial exploitation of aborted fetal tissue."

• In the statement, StemExpress says, "StemExpress sought a TRO on the grounds that CMP and Daleiden violated California’s anti-wiretapping law under Penal Code § 632 (Invasion of Privacy Act). The court granted our TRO and will consider our request for a preliminary injunction next month." 

• This is interesting because some people may see this as the company having something to hide that they don't want Daleiden and CMP to uncover. 

• StemExpress and Government/Court are new stakeholders.

9. Undercover video shows Planned Parenthood Officials discussing fetal organs used for research

• This comes from the politics section of the Washington Post;  it is an esteemed publication.

• The authors are Sandhya Somashekhar and Danielle Paquette. Somashekhar is a social change reporter, liberal based on public appearance. Paquette is concerned with gender and policy, she is from Indiana and based on her social media she seems to be liberal. 

• The source came out the same day as the event. What makes this article different than the others I have read, is that it includes events surrounding the incident. 

• The source touches on the congressional and state investigations that were initiated because of CMP's video release, it also touches on how this affects the bigger debate- could aid the ban on abortion

• Quoted Carly Fiorina- new stakeholder (political gain if against the video)

• Shows that the government complied with the wishes of many anti-abortion supporters/activists and investigated clinics, like the one in Texas and Kansas- and even then, they still did not find any compelling evidence of wrongdoing.

10. Ending Planned Parenthood's Tyranny of Euphemisms

• Comes from the National Review, at times reputable, but a conservative publication.

• The article is an interview between Kathryn Jean Lopez and David Daleiden
• Lopez is the current editor at large at NR, she is known as a conservative columnist

• This came out on July 30th, 2015, a lot of footage surfaced by then by CMP.

• Although the interview may be biased, there is a lot of important information offered

• It is interesting to get into the mind of Daleiden and see his view; he explains that the work he has done communicates the truth. The interview gives me answers to questions everyone has for Daleiden. 
• also, it really gives me an idea of how someone very different from me/liberals/pro-choice people think which will be useful for the project-- points of view