Until pro-lifers raised an ungodly stink about it this last week, the trial received very little national coverage. There are three theories for why that didn’t happen: 1) journalists are a bunch of pro-choice ideologues; 2) the subject matter is just too gross; or 3) it simply failed to blip on most journalistic radar screens.

The last argument is the most intriguing. Jeffrey Goldberg, writing in Bloomberg View, admitted of the trial that “I first heard of it this week.” On the Atlantic’s website, Conor Friedersdorf, in making the case that this should be a Kinsleyan Page 1 story, wrote, “Until Thursday, I wasn’t aware of this story.”…

Well, full marks for honesty. Still, it is an astounding admission by serious journalists — journalists who are paid a premium to have their finger on the pulse of the American body politic — that this story had not even registered until the register of the pro-life complaints became almost deafening…

My sense is that, with the outpouring over the Gosnell case, the reportorial dynamic on life issues is due for a sea change. Abortion on the pro-life side of the ledger is no longer a niche concern and journalists would do well to acknowledge this and adjust their coverage accordingly. Either that or get ready for thousands upon thousands of angry tweets.