Sometimes the media’s double standards are too ridiculous to ignore. A few weeks ago, conservative students at UCLA released a recording of a prank phone call they made to Planned Parenthood of Idaho last summer. The student told Autumn Kersey, vice president of development and marketing, that he wanted to make a donation to specifically cover the abortion of an African-American baby — because, as he said, “the less black kids out there, the better.” He continued: “I really face trouble with affirmative action, and I don’t want my kids being disadvantaged, you know, against black kids. I just had a baby; I want to put it in his name.”

Rather than slamming down the receiver, Kersey can be heard on tape laughing and saying, “understandable, understandable.” She immediately went to work helping the prankster with his race-specific donation: “This is the first time I’ve had a donor call and make this kind of request, so I’m excited and want to make sure I don’t leave anything out,” she said.

Did you hear about this story? I didn’t think so. The drama queens in the media are usually quick to act whenever someone in the public eye makes an ambiguously racist comment, but when some abortionist gets caught on tape saying it’s “understandable” that a donor wants fewer black children in the world, they suddenly have bigger fish to fry.

Compare this story to other recent controversies over alleged racism. Last year, when members of the Duke lacrosse team were accused of raping a black woman, the pages of major newspapers were filled with vague, yet dramatic, insinuations: “She was black, they were white, and race and sex were in the air,” began a story in the Washington Post. The media didn’t wait for the evidence to come out before filling the airwaves with commentary on institutional racism at Duke.

How about we discuss the possibility of institutional racism at Planned Parenthood? After all, it was founded by a eugenicist, Margaret Sanger, who referred to blacks as “human weeds” who were hogging resources better reserved for whites. She distributed birth control to African-Americans — not because she cared about their reproductive rights, but because she thought the last thing America needed was more black people. (Today, one-third of the 1.5 million abortions performed every year in the U.S. are on black women, even though blacks make up only 12 percent of the population. Mission accomplished, Margaret!)

Oh, is Planned Parenthood’s eugenicist history not relevant? The media obviously thought Duke’s history as a bastion of southern white elitism was relevant. And why did Kersey believe that even if her superiors discovered the source of the donation, she wouldn’t get in trouble? (And she didn’t, at least not until the UCLA students busted her.) These are questions we’d be asking about any institution not favored and protected by the media.

And just as the media are usually eager to investigate any institution suspected of racism, they also take delight in destroying the careers of people who utter racist comments. Last year, radio shock jock Don Imus jokingly referred to women of the Rutgers basketball team as “nappy-headed hos.” Despite Imus’ repeated apologies, CBS threw him off the air — and newspaper columnists and talk show hosts punished him with a weekslong public flogging.

At least to my way of thinking, cheerfully accepting a racist donation is worse than telling a nasty joke. But the media crusaders haven’t demanded that anyone at Planned Parenthood be fired, or that the Idaho state office be investigated. In fact, save for conservative Web sites and a few small newspapers, they’ve refused to even mention the story.
This column isn’t about whether abortion is right or wrong, or whether Planned Parenthood is suffering from “institutional racism.” But when it comes to the media’s reporting on racial bias, can’t they at least have the same standards for the abortion industry?

Ashley Herzog is a senior journalism major. Send her an e-mail at ah103304@ohiou.edu.