I have friends who’ve gone through the gut-wrenching experience of infertility, and you probably do too. Perhaps you’ve personally endured the hell of trying and failing to get pregnant, or getting pregnant then losing the baby. It sounds like an emotionally and sometimes physically exhausting journey, and one of things I’m proud of doing on The Project was talking about, normalising and destigmatising the issue on primetime TV.
A new policy from Kamala Harris will be some comfort to the millions of Americans who’ve struggled to conceive. In a campaign stop in Michigan this week she announced that under her administration “your government will pay for, or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for, all costs associated with IVF treatment”.
IVF is a miraculous technology that means people who couldn’t otherwise have children get the opportunity to start a healthy family. On hearing her announcement, the Michigan crowd erupted in applause, perhaps in recognition that the tens of thousands of dollars prospective parents currently pay for IVF treatments are effectively a tax to do what most couples can do naturally.
I wonder what your thoughts are on this policy, and I wonder if they change at all if I tell you it wasn’t Kamala Harris who announced this policy but her opponent Donald Trump - the details above including the quote, are otherwise accurate, it’s just that it was him who said it not her.
That was a dirty trick and one I promise I won’t play often, but it was a convenient way to illustrate some of the thoughts I’ve been sharing recently about separating the idea from the person.
Mostly though it’s a way of plugging Substacker Zaid Jilani, whose “American Saga” reports on stories mainstream media outlets miss - arguably because they don’t quite fit with the way that media wants to portray the world. The IVF announcement was covered in a post I got from him this morning.
Zaid, the American son of Pakistani-immigrants, was tired of having to pitch to left or right-leaning publications depending on what the angle of his story was. I came across his newsletter via his reporting of an Oxford University study showing American voters don’t show prejudice against female or black candidates when choosing who to vote for (in fact show a slight positive prejudice towards them).
The Oxford researcher noticed that when the (possibly unexpected) results were published, media outlets who were formerly interested in covering them lost interest in the story. Is that because good news doesn’t sell? Because an experiment showing no prejudice isn’t newsworthy? Or because the idea that some aspect of race relations has improved is simply too jarring against the view of the world those publications have an interest in promoting?
I chat to Zaid about his theory on all this, and about some of his other favourite less-covered stories in an upcoming RNZ interview. I’ll update this post with a link when it runs, likely week after next.
It always happens! As soon as you point something out, the contradiction pops up, and sure enough, here’s the NY Times with their less article including that position (and then his walking it back).
I take your point re the media trying to force narratives into a left/right dichotomy, though.
(Article free to read)
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/31/us/politics/trump-abortion-stance.html?unlocked_article_code=1.HE4.FF9I.eqhhIfPPZUtf&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb
What a dirty trick! Getting me to approve ANYTHING TFG says 🥹(the former guy for non-US politics followers..) Definitely admit to a) some bias in giving credit to someone I like as opposed to someone I abhor but b) being able to support what I think is a GOOD idea, regardless. After all, if their followers get on board because they are cult members, more chance of getting it done I reckon.
Not surprised that media outlets etc. are more interested in research that SUPPORTS their worldview - if they have one i..e. Fox News in the US & NZ Herald in Aotearoa! And it goes without saying for bloggers & podcasters & rightwing radio hosts 🤷🏾♀️ as well as left leaning - not many people who share information that goes against their whole schtick eh? Look forward to the full interview - invaluable in the current climate of mis/disinformation & media bias during critical times for being well informed.