Between GigsSurviving unemployment

This is blog number six in my series where I am evaluating a website called “The Pill Kills”. To read the previous blogs in this series, just scroll through “Between Gigs”. In this blog, I will be using the criteria from the United Nations that is called “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources”. It is a tool that can be used to evaluate how reliable, factual, and accurate a website is. It can also be used to evaluate individual articles within a website.

Just to make everything clear, here are those criteria:

Criteria 1: Accuracy
In short, this says that you need to look at who is hosting the website that you are evaluating. “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?” You should ask “What are their biases?” Remember to verify the information on that website with information found in other sources.

Criteria 2: Authority
Try to find information about the author, (or contributors). Check to see if the webpages include references. “A good website should provide a way to contact the producers of the site”. Determine where the website is getting their information from. In short, check the sources, and check the qualifications of the author / contributors.

Criteria 3: Objectivity
Check if advertising and informational content are being supplied by the same person or organization. Examine if there is a bias in the informational content.

Criteria 4: Currency
When was the website last updated? In some cases, older information may not be accurate. Look for broken links, which indicate that the page has been abandoned. How often are new links added to the website?

Criteria 5: Coverage
Compare the information found on the website that you are evaluating with the information found on other websites.

In this blog, I will use the above criteria to evaluate an article on “The Pill Kills” that is titled: “How the Pill Kills Women”.

What “pill” is the American Life League talking about on “The Pill Kills” website? In general, when a person uses the phrase “The Pill” they are referring to an prescription medication that is taken orally by a women in order to prevent pregnancy, to regulate her menstrual cycle, or to help with several other types of conditions. It is prescribed by a doctor. It is not something a person can walk into a pharmacy, pull off the shelf, and buy. I think it is reasonable to believe that when “The Pill Kills” mentions “The Pill”, this is the medication that they are referring to.

Criteria One says that I should verify the information that I find on a website that I am evaluating with other sources.

The Mayo Clinic says: There are two main types of birth control pills – combination birth control pills, which contain estrogen and progestin, and the minipill, which contains only progestin.

Planned Parenthood says: Some birth control pills contain two hormones – estrogen and progestin. These are called combination pills. Some are progestin-only pills. Most women take combination pills.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says: There are two basic types of birth control pills: 1) combination pills, which contain the hormone estrogen and progestin, and 2) progestin-only pills

All three of these sources give the same information. Now that I have reliable information about what “The Pill” is, I can begin to evaluate the article called “How the Pill Kills Women”.

Criteria One also says to learn who is hosting the website that you are evaluating, and to note what their biases are. The previous blogs in this series show that “The Pill Kills” is sponsored by the American Life League. This group has a pro-life bias. There are eight co-sponsores to “The Pill Kills”. Seven of them have a pro-life bias. One of them is a Christian website that does not mention anything about birth control or abortion at all.

I cannot simply copy and paste the entire thing into this blog, because that would be plagiarism. I highly recommend you click this link to the article so that you can easily follow along with me.

Criteria 2: Authority
Try to find information about the author, (or contributors). Check to see if the webpages include references. “A good website should provide a way to contact the producers of the site”. Determine where the website is getting their information from. In short, check the sources, and check the qualifications of the author / contributors.

This article does not have an author listed. Therefore, there is no way to find information about the person who wrote this article. I cannot check the qualifications of the author.

There is a way to contact the American Life League on “The Pill Kills” website, (on their Home page).

It appears to have 20 links that it is using as resources. There are additional links attached to a portion that appears after the article itself ends. This is where the writer of the article is getting his or her information from.

Link Number One is connected to this sentence: We must educate American women because so many people are telling them, Taking the pill is simple, safe, and convenient”.

The link goes to Planned Parenthood. On this page, under a heading that reads “Birth Control Pills at a Glance”, it does say “safe, effective, and convenient”.

This shows one group that says birth control pills are “safe, effective, and convenient”. One group does not equal “so many people”. It is worth noting that part of American Life League includes an organization that is called STOPP, which stands for “Stop Planned Parenthood”.

Since I evaluated the co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills” with Criteria One from the UN’s list, it seems only fair that I also use the same criteria to evaluate the websites that are linked to as sources in the article I am now evaluating.

The About Page at Planned Parenthood says:

Planned Parenthood is the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive health care provider and advocate.

An extended About Page says:

The Planned Parenthood community is made up of Planned Parenthood Federation of American, Inc., (PPFA), which is the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive health care advocate and provider, and 85 independent, affiliated local organizations – all operating under the Planned Parenthood name.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”

Planned Parenthood is not a University. It is not a government. There are no credentials on their website that would indicate that they are a professional organization. They are not a publisher.

Are they a commercial host? Not exactly. They are a health care provider. People can receive certain types of health care for free if they cannot pay for them. The do accept some forms of health insurance as payment, too.

They are an advocacy group. They advocate for women and men who need education about, or health care services related to, sexual and reproductive health care.

* “What are their biases?”
Planned Parenthood is a health care provider that specializes in sexual and reproductive health care. If this can be called a bias, then each and every doctor, gynecologist, obstetrician, and family practitioner, in the world also has the same bias. If this is a bias, it is a bias in favor of providing access to health care.

Link Number Two is being used as a source that is connected to a short paragraph that mentions a woman named Julie Hennessey, “a 31-year old Irish woman”, who dies of a blood clot. The article says that The Pill caused her to develop deep vein thrombosis.

The link goes to an article called “Birth Control Pill Creates Blood Clot Causing Death of Irish Woman”. It is from a website called LifeSiteNews. The article was published August 17, 2007. That article does mention an Irish woman named Julie Hennessy who died at the age of 31 from deep vein thrombosis on March 22 of 2006.

There are no links to source material where that information came from. To learn more, I did a Google search. I found this article on a website called Independent.ie. It was published on November 30, 2011.

This article confirms that there was an Irish woman named Julie Hennessy who died from a blood clot. Her parents sued the doctor for negligence, and won the lawsuit.

Part of the article reads:
It was claimed that on March 13, 2007 — nine days before her death — Julie (31) attended Dr Bayyari. She had complained of lower limb pain following a fall while skiing four weeks previously.

One week later, she again attended Dr Bayyari, complaining of fatigue, lack of energy and shortness of breath. It was claimed that on that date Dr Bayyari was aware of Julie’s previous history of asthma and migraine and that she was using Ventolin and Beclazone for her asthma, a beta blocker (Metacor) for her migraine and an oral contraceptive medication.

It goes on to say:
Court documents also claim the cause of death was given as pulmonary embolism, due to DVT with coincidental oral contraceptive use. It was alleged that Julie had raised the possibility of DVT with her doctor.

From this, it seems that Julie Hennessey did die from a deep vein thrombosis. The court determined that it was caused by the birth control pills she was taking.

Which kind of birth control pills was she taking? An article from The Free Library dot com says:

Ms Hennessy, who had been taking the contraceptive pill Mercilon for many years, died from a blood clot. Pathologist Dr Peter Szontagh-Kishazi from James Connolly Memorial hospital, told Dublin County Coroner’s Court: “The only important factor was the oral contraceptive pill.

Ok, so what is Mercilon? According to NetDoctor.co.uk, it is a form of oral contraceptive. It contains ethinylestradiol 20 micrograms and desogestrel 150 micrograms.

Mercilon does NOT contain the same ingredients as “The Pill”, as defined by the Mayo Clinic, Planned Parenthood, and The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Mercilon is NOT on the FDA’s list of approved medications. This means that women in the United States who are prescribed birth control pills are NOT being prescribed Mercilon, the medication that caused the death of Julie Hennessey.

It appears that “The Pill Kills” article is attempting to say that the birth control that Julie Hennessey was using in 2006 in Ireland is equivalent to the birth control pills that are being prescribed in the United States today, (and therefore, that they pose the exact same risks). This is deceptive.

Link Number Two came from a website called LifeSiteNews dot com. Their About Page says, (among other things), the following:

3. LifeSiteNews.com’s writers and its founders, have come to understand that respect for life and family are endangered by an international conflict. That conflict is between radically opposed views of the worth and dignity of every human life and of family life and community. It has been caused by secularists attempting to eliminate Christian morality and natural law principles which are seen as the primary obstacles to implementing their new world order.

4. LifeSiteNews.com understands that abortion, euthanasia, cloning, homosexuality and all other moral, life and family issues are all interconnected in an international conflict affecting all nations, even at the most local levels. LifeSiteNews attempts to provide its readers with the big picture and the most useful and up-to-date information on this conflict.

It also says:
The service was originally started by Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), a Canadian national pro-life organization headquartered in Toronto, Canada. Campaign Life Coalition, founded in 1978, was one of the first pro-life organizations to emphasize the international dimension of attacks on life and family. Along with a few other groups it pioneered pro-life lobbying at United Nations conferences. CLC president, Jim Hughes, is currently also vice-president of the International Right to Life Federation.

CLC’s international dimension spurred the development of LifeSiteNews as an international news service. LifeSiteNews.com U.S. and Canada are now separate incorporated non-profit organizations, are not involved in direct political action and do not support or oppose political candidates or parties. LifeSiteNews is strictly a news and information service.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”

LifeSiteNews (and its parent group, Canadian Life Coalition), are not a University. They are not a government. There are no credentials on their website to indicate that they are a professional association. It appears that you can read LifeSiteNews for free, which means that they are not selling it, and therefore, are not a commercial host.

They are an advocacy group, and they are a publisher.

* “What are their biases?”
They have a strong pro-life bias. They also have a bias against “secularists”, whom they believe are attempting to create a “new world order” and to eliminate Christianity.

So far, I have evaluated the first two links that “The Pill Kills” used as source material in their article called “The Pill Kills Women”. Already, it is clear that they are distorting the facts in order to fit their pro-life bias. I will continue my evaluation of that article in my next blog.

This is blog number five in a series where I am evaluating a website called “The Pill Kills”. I used the first criteria from the United Nation’s “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources” as a guide to ensure a consistent set of tools to use as I learned about each of the co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills”.

As a quick review, this is the criteria I used to evaluate each of the co-sponsors.

Criteria One: Accuracy
In short, this says that you need to look at who is hosting the website that you are evaluating. “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?” You should ask “What are their biases?” Remember to verify the information on that website with information found in other sources.

In this blog, I will quickly review what I learned as I went to other sources in order to verify information about the co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills”.

“The Pill Kills” has a page that asks people to protest the pill. It contains the following paragraph:

Concerned citizens from coast to coast will join American Life League in the largest annual protest against the birth control pill and similar products. Join us by organizing a protest in your community at Planned Parenthood or another facility that distributes birth control. We are eager to assist you with the details.

The American Life League is specifically mentioned. It says that “concerned citizens from coast to coast” will join them in their protest. At the bottom of every page on that website, you can see the logo, name, and copyright of American Life League. Based upon this, I believe that American Life League is the sponsor of “The Pill Kills”.

On the same page is a box that says “COSPONSORS”. The American Life League did not attach links to any of the sponsors in this list. In order to learn more about them, I had to do several Google searches, and carefully read over the links it found, in an attempt to find information about each of the co-sponsors. This took several hours. There is no information about any of the co-sponsors, other than their name, anywhere within “The Pill Kills” site.

It is generally considered to be good “netiquette” for an organization that has enlisted the help of co-sponsors to link to each co-sponsors page from the website that describes the project that they are providing some sort of help with. It is a reciprocal way of saying “thank you”.

The sponsor receives help from each co-sponsor. Help could be a financial donation, a donation of time, an effort to promote the project, or simply a statement that the co-sponsor supports the cause. The sponsor links to the co-sponsors in order to drive traffic to their websites. Everyone benefits with this arrangement.

“The Pill Kills” website chose not to link to any of their co-sponsors.

Take a look at the COSPONSORS box on “The Pill Kills” website. Most people are not going to take the time to look at them very closely. At first glance, it appears that a bunch of different organizations are supporting “The Pill Kills”. If you count each name listed in the box of co-sponsors, you can see that it looks like there are nineteen. Someone who only glances at this website might come to the conclusion that “The Pill Kills” has a whole lot of support.

Let’s look a bit closer. I am going to include the information that I learned about each co-sponsor, and that I wrote in previous blogs, in a shortened format. If you would like to read the whole thing, just scroll back and check out the previous blogs in this series.

There were some groups that I was unable to find a website or Facebook page for in my first attempt. I gave those another try so that I could include information that is as accurate as possible.

It appears that there are 19 co-sponsors.

The second co-sponsor on the list is American Life League. I don’t think that they can be both a sponsor and a co-sponsor. It is obvious that they are the sponsor of “The Pill Kills”. It is somewhat misleading to put themselves into the box of co-sponsors as well.

19 – 1 = 18 co-sponsors.

I would like to correct a mistake I made in the first blog. In that blog, I attempted to locate a co-sponsor that I thought was called Right to Life Education Fund. Many groups use these words, and I could not discern which of them was the real co-sponsor.

This was an error. I re-read the box of co-sponsors, and learned that the actual co-sponsor was California Right to Life Education Fund. I found a recent newsletter from this group. A box on that page is titled “Who is California Right to Life?” It answers this question by saying that they are a 501 -c-3 organization established to educate the public about pro-life issues.

They are connected with California Right to Life Committee, Inc., which is a 501-c-4 organization providing information on legislative issues affecting the right to life, and pro-life political advocacy.

In short, they are both advocacy groups with a pro-life bias.

The information also says:

Both are affiliates of American Life League, headed by Judie Brown, and share the same “no-exceptions, no excuses” beliefs and the same dedication to promoting the Culture of Life, respecting all innocent human life from the single-cell stage to natural death.

Here is a quick list of the co-sponsors that are connected with, affiliated with, or associated with, American Life League:

* California Right to Life Education Fund – affiliate of American Life League
* Children of God for Life – has Judie Brown, founder of American Life League as their Vice-President of Pro-Life Activities
* PLEA (Pro-Life Education Association) – became associated with American Life League on December 11, 1989
* Right to Life of the Central Coast – became an affiliate of American Life League on March 2, 2012
* St. Gerard Campus, Inc – became associated with American Life League on August 13, 2011.
* Stop Planned Parenthood International (STOPP) – became associated with the American Life League on December 11, 1989.

These six groups are, in one way or another, a part of American Life League. The information that each group sends out is very likely to come from the same sources. It was somewhat misleading for American Life League, the sponsor of “The Pill Kills” to list themselves as a co-sponsor. It is extremely misleading to list six segments of their organization in the co-sponsor box as though each of them had absolutely nothing to do with American Life League.

Listing your own group as co-sponsors, several times, does not make the information on your website any more reliable, accurate, or scientifically valid.

18 – 6 = 12 co-sponsors

There were some co-sponsors that “The Pill Kills” listed that I was completely unable to find a website, or a Facebook page, for. I tried once again a few minutes ago, to make sure that I had not left one out in error, (as I did with the California Right to Life Education Fund).

Some of these groups had names that were similar to several different groups. Since “The Pill Kills” chose not to link to their sponsors, I was unable to be certain which of those groups was the actual co-sponsor. I called these searches “inconclusive”. I cannot prove they are a co-sponsor of “The Pill Kills”, and I cannot prove they are not a co-sponsor of “The Pill Kills”.

Those groups are:
* Family and Life Advocates
* Old Brooklyn Pro-Life Association
* St. Jude Respect Life Ministry (I also Googled Respect Life Ministry, but the results were just as unclear).
* The Right to Know

12 – 4 = 8 co-sponsors

Now, let’s take a look at the 8 actual co-sponsors. They are:
* AMEN (Abortion Must End Now) – advocacy group with pro-life bias. Strongly encourage people to purchase books about Christian Courtship (but not directly from their website).
* Cherish Life Ministries – advocacy group with pro-life bias. Provides internet marketing technology, pro-life resources and educational materials
* Focus Pregnancy Help Center – advocacy group with pro-life bias
* LifeSource Ministries – Christian group. Does not specifically mention anything about abortion or birth control. Provides Renewal Conferences and Spiritual Counseling
* Mother and Unborn Baby Care, Inc. – advocacy group with pro-life bias. Repeatedly points out in their newsletter all the ways that you can donate to their group. Offered conference called “Leaving a Legacy for Life through Planned Giving”.
* Pharmacists for Life International – advocacy group protecting the pre born and defending pharmacists’s rights of conscience. Are selling fresh flowers on their website. Have several clear and obvious things to click on that will allow you to send them money.
* Pro-Life Wisconsin – Both a political and social advocacy group with a strong pro-life bias. This group is working on changing current laws to match their group’s interests.
* The Movement for a Better America – advocacy group that has a pro-life bias. Is connected to the Tea Party. Is selling speaking engagements and has a book coming out

As you can see, the majority of the co-sponsors have a pro-life bias. Having a bias, for or against something, in and of itself is not automatically a bad thing. There are plenty of websites, all across the internet, that include articles or blogs that are biased.

For example, let’s say I wrote a blog that was titled “The Green Bay Packers Stink!”. Let’s say this blog was filled with information about the many ways that this particular sports team is lousy. Let’s say it contains links to other blogs that also say that the Packers stink.

If you hate the Packers, then you will probably find that blog to be an enjoyable read. You probably won’t take the time to evaluate where I got my information from. You might link the blog to your Facebook page, and share it with like-minded friends. If you don’t really care one way or another about the Packers you might read it to see if the information looked reliable, and move on. If you are a big fan of the Packers, then that blog is probably going to make you really angry, and you might leave a nasty comment on it.

Now, after you read my blog called “The Green Bay Packers Stink!” you discover that I just so happen to be a HUGE fan of the Chicago Bears. These two teams are big rivals. Suddenly, the words I wrote in my blog about the Packers appear much less reliable, and not quite so factual. Of course they do! I, as a huge Bears fan, have a bias. I have an intrinsic interest in encouraging people to hate the team that is the biggest rival of the team I love.

Many of the co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills” are the same group as the sponsor, American Life League. Many of the co-sponsors are advocacy groups with a pro-life bias. (And, many of those groups are hoping to sell a product or a service).

Keep that in mind as you go over the information that you see on “The Pill Kills” website. It is very likely going to be biased information. You can choose to accept it or reject it. Just keep in mind that it is not providing you a balanced viewpoint.

In my next blog, I will begin to evaluate the information that is in the articles that appear on “The Pill Kills”. I also will identify the resources that they link to as source material, and evaluate those websites in the same way as I have evaluated the co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills”.

This is blog number four in a series where I am evaluating a website called “The Pill Kills”. In this blog, I will continue to use the first criteria from the United Nation’s “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources” as a guide to ensure a consistent set of tools that I can use as I learn about each of the co-sponsors.

Criteria One: Accuracy
In short, this says that you need to look at who is hosting the website that you are evaluating. “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?” You should ask “What are their biases?” Remember to verify the information on that website with information found in other sources.

So far, I have attempted to verify the information I found on “The Pill Kills” list of co-sponsors with information found in other sources. I have gone over eleven of the groups that are listed as co-sponsors so far.

Co-sponsor Twelve: PLEA (Pro-Life Education Association)
Interesting! I cannot find an official website for this organization. However, there are two Facebook pages for it. Or, perhaps, there are two different organizations with the same name, who both joined Facebook in 2011? I’m going to learn about both of them, because I cannot tell which one is actually the co-sponsor of “The Pill Kills”. For the sake of clarity, I will refers to one as “PLEA A” and the other as “PLEA B”.

PLEA A joined Facebook on October 21, 2011. Their mission statement reads:

To reveal the lies of the abortion industry, challenge the pro-choice position, encourage a culture of LIFE, actively participate in godly pro-life efforts and represent the unborn as the VOICE FOR THE VOICELESS.

The most recent post on their Facebook page is an article from a website called Live Action dot org. It was posted on December 20, 2011. There are a total of 2 postings of articles from that website. There are a total of 7 postings that link articles from a website called LifeSite News dot com. One posting is an article from mercatornet dot com, one posting of an article from a website called yeson26 dot net, and one posting of an article from a website called 40daysforlife dot com. The majority of the articles they have posted come from LifeSite News dot com.

There is one posting of a group of photos of people who attended some event the group had. One posting is a “welcome”. One posting asked people to suggest their Facebook page to friends. One posting states the number of babies saved by the 40 Days for Life. This statistic does not have a link to anywhere, and cannot be immediately verified. One link is of a photo of a sculpture.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

PLEA A is not a University. It is not a government. There isn’t anything on their Facebook page to indicate that it is a professional organization. They do not appear to be selling any products, so it is not a commercial host. It is not a publisher. It is an advocacy group.

* “What are their biases?”
This group has a strong pro-life bias.

PLEA B joined Facebook on April 4, 2011. There is a map on their Facebook page that points to somewhere in Maine. Their mission reads:

To support the principle that human life is a sacred gift from God and should be protected from conception to natural death.
To promote educational endeavors that express this truth.
To contribute to legislative and executive efforts to protect human life.
To demonstrate legally and appropriately our adherence to the pro-life cause.
To seek judicial decisions favorable to the pro-life cause.

The mission statement of PLEA A and PLEA B are not identical. This could mean that they are two, separate, groups, that happen to have the same name. “The Pill Kills” did not link to the co-sponsors who appear in their list, so there isn’t any way to know, for certain, which of these two groups is actually a co-sponsor.

However, the information listed in PLEA B’s “Description” gives a clue.

On December 11, 1989 PLEA became associated with American Life League, a national pro-life organization headed by Judie Brown with headquarters in Stafford, Virginia.

In an earlier blog I showed that the American Life League, which is headed by Judie Brown, is the sponsor of “The Pill Kills”. The American Life League is also listed as a co-sponsor of “The Pill Kills”. I also learned that Judie Brown just so happens to be the Vice-President of Pro-Life Activities at Children of God for Life, (another co-sponsor of “The Pill Kills”). That makes a total of three different groups that Judie Brown is directly connected with.

The most recent post on PLEA B’s Facebook page is a link to an article from a website called Stopp dot org. A woman named Rita Diller spoke at the annual brunch of a group called “STOPP”. This is an acronym for Stop Planned Parenthood.

If you go to the STOPP website, there is a contact page. You can leave your name, email address, and message in the boxes provided. Or, you can send an email to: Stop Planned Parenthood c/o American Life League. The STOPP website also says:

Rita Diller, STOPP National Director
Rita Diller is the National Director of American Life League’s Stop Planned Parenthood project.

As National Director, Rita is responsible for leading American Life League’s effort against Planned Parenthood in the United States. She is the managing editor of the Wednesday STOPP Report and is responsible for overseeing research on Planned Parenthood and supplying detailed information about PP to pro-lifers all across the country.

When I contacted “The Pill Kills”, to tell them my reasons why I will not be attending their protest, I got an email back from Rita Dillar. The email lists her as “Director, American Life League’s The Pill Kills Project”. This means that Rita Dillar is directly involved with STOPP and with American Life League’s “The Pill Kills” project.

The Facebook for the group I’m calling PLEA B also posted a link to an article at STOPP dot org that announces that Rita Dillar will be the speaker at the STOPP annual brunch. This link was posted on July 4, 2011. On July 5, 2011, there is a post about PLEA. If you click the link, it circles right back around to the same Facebook page. An earlier posting connects with a Facebook page called “Authentic Choice”, (which has no information about itself). It talks about materials that can be shared.

There is 1 posting that link to articles from a website called Pro Life Action dot org. The rest appear to be random. There is one posting that links to an article from Live Action dot org. PLEA A had two postings of articles from that website.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

PLEA B is not a University or a government. It did not list any credentials on its Facebook page, so it is not a professional organization. It is not selling a product or service, so it is not a commercial group. It is not a publisher. It is an advocacy group.

* “What are their biases?”
This group has a strong pro-life bias.

Co-sponsor Thirteen: Pro-Life Wisconsin
According to its website,Pro-Life Wisconsin is:

…a new statewide legislative and educational pro-life organization was formed in Wisconsin. The vision for this new organization was shared by dedicated and experienced pro-lifers who realized that the pro-life movement needed to refocus on principle to achieve total protection for all preborn children

Their About page goes on to say:

Founded on the bedrock principle of the pro-life movement – that all preborn babies are “persons” and all innocent persons share the inalienable right to life – Pro-Life Wisconsin educates the public and lobbies elected officials. Believing that “it is never the will of the Father in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost” (Matthew 18:14), Pro-Life Wisconsin is a Christian organization relying on God to change hearts and minds toward His most precious creation of human life.

and also:

Through advocacy at the State Capitol in Madison, we urge our elected officials to ban surgical abortion without exceptions for rape, incest, or the life and health of the mother. We advocate passage of a state constitutional amendment to establish the legal personhood of every preborn child from fertilization. We defend the conscience rights of medical professionals who refuse to prescribe or dispense abortifacient drugs or devices, and we work to stop all efforts to legalize euthanasia, assisted suicide and infanticide.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

Pro-Life Wisconsin is not a University. They are not a government. They are not selling a product or service, so they are not a commercial group. I don’t think they are publishing anything. I don’t think they are a professional organization, because I do not see any credentials on their website.

They absolutely are an advocacy group. Their About Page says the group “lobbies elected officials”, and says they are “a new statewide legislative” group. Pro-Life Wisconsin is an advocacy group in both the political sense of the word, and also in the sense that includes advocating for a certain group.

* “What are their biases?”
This group has a strong pro-life bias.

Co-sponsor Fourteen: Right to Life of the Central Coast
Right to Life of the Central Coast is located on the Central Coast of California. The Google search did not come up with an official website for this organization. However, they do have a Facebook page.

Their About page says:

Central Coast Right to Life; Defending life at all ages and stages…

It also says:

We are an affiliate of American Life League

The Google search had a link to an official announcement that said Right to Life of the Central Coast had become an affiliate of American Life League on March 2, 2012.

Let’s review. American Life League is the sponsor of “The Pill Kills”.
Out of the co-sponsors I have learned about so far:
* American Life League – listed itself as a co-sponsor
* Children of God for Life – has Judie Brown, the founder of American Life League as their Vice President of Pro-Life Activities
* Pro-Life Education Association – Became associated with American Life League in on December 11, 1989
* Right to Life of the Central Coast – Became an affiliate with American Life League on March 2, 2010.

A pattern is emerging.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

Right to Life of the Central Coast is not a University. It is not a government. There are no credentials on their Facebook page, so they are not a professional organization. They are not selling anything, so they are not a commercial host. They are not a publisher. They are an advocacy group.

* “What are their biases?”
This group has a strong pro-life bias.

The most recent post on their Facebook page was on March 5, 2012. It has a link to an article from Pattie Maguire Armstrong dot com. The previous two postings each contain a link to that same website.

There are 6 postings that have links to articles from a website called Life News dot com. There also are a few postings of articles from other websites. I did not scroll back farther than what Facebook allows me to without clicking on a link to see more. It shows all postings to this Facebook page that happened after January of 2012.

Co-sponsor Fifteen: St. Gerard Campus, Inc.
The first link that comes up when I did a Google search for St. Gerard Campus, Inc., is a website for a Christian High School called St. Gerard Campus. The Google search picked it up because, later on in that website, it mentions Ward Family Foundation, Inc. Google highlighted the words “St. Gerard Campus” and the word “Inc.”, and assumed this was what I was looking for. In this case, Google is incorrect about what I was trying to search for.

The second link that comes up in my Google search is for “The Pill Kills” website. It takes me right to the page that has their co-sponsors listed on it.

Many of the rest of the links that Google found connect to websites that are reviewing a school. I see Citysearch. I see a site called Christian Volunteering dot org that has information on, and maps to, several schools. I see a manta dot com link, and a School Reviews Florida link. None are the official website of this … I am guessing “school”.

Then, I found this! It is an article from a website called HistoricCity News. The article was published on August 13, 2011. It is titled: “St. Gerard joins national pro-life network”.

Part of the article reads:

Paul E. Rondeau reported to Historic City News reporters that St. Gerard Campus, Inc. in St. Augustine has joined three other new members of the American Life League national network of associates.

This means that we can add St. Gerard Campus, Inc., to the list of co-sponsors that are directly connected with American Life League. The total is now at four (if you don’t count American Life League a second time, since they are listed as a co-sponsor, and are clearly the sponsor, of “The Pill Kills”.

Another part of that article says:

St. Gerard Campus, Inc. is an independent, nonprofit community; consisting of a pregnancy resource center, maternity home and Christian high school for pregnant teenagers with on-site teaching daycare.

The St. Gerard Residency Program allows pregnant teenagers and their babies to live at St. Gerard Campus while attending school.

Oh, I see! So, the first link that Google came up with was correct, after all! My apologies, Google.

St. Gerard Campus, (which is listed as St. Gerard Campus, Inc., in “The Pill Kills” list of co-sponsors), is:

Located in St. Augustine, Florida, St. Gerard Campus is an independent, non-political, non-sectarian facility designed to assist pregnant teenagers and unwed mothers. We are prepared to provide assistance and referrals for medical care, educational needs, or job services to all women, regardless of age, marital status, race or religion. Our statistics show that most unplanned pregnancies occur in the 20-29 year old age group. We will help you!

All of our services are provided free of charge and kept strictly confidential.

They provide free pregnancy testing, sonograms, personal counseling and group counseling. They assist with adoption.

We have a fully-accredited interfaith Christian High School with on-site Daycare for our students. Our Residency Program allows pregnant teenagers and their babies to live at St. Gerard Campus while attending school.

I read over their FAQ page. It states that it costs $6,000 per school year, and the cost of their residency is $6,000. They have a sliding scale, according to the ability to pay. They will never turn any pregnant teen away due to inability to pay.

It also says:

Q: Do you provide abortions?
A: No, St. Gerard Campus provides young women with viable alternatives to abortion and the services to back them up.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

St. Gerard Campus Inc., is not a University. It is a residency program for pregnant teenagers who are trying to finish high school. It is not a government. There are no credentials on their website that indicate that it is a professional organization. They are not a publisher.

They are a commercial host. They provide a service that has a specific price (or a sliding scale). Are they an advocacy group? Free Dictionary dot com defines “Advocacy Group” as:

“A group of persons working on behalf of or strongly supporting a particular cause, such as an item of legislation, an industry, or a special segment of society”.

St. Gerard Campus Inc., is providing support to pregnant teenagers who want to finish high school and who are not having an abortion. This could be considered as working on behalf of a special segment of society. I think they are an advocacy group, and a commercial host.

* “What are their biases?”
Since they assist pregnant teenagers with giving birth, and with adoption, but not with abortion, I would say they have a pro-life bias. They also are selling a service.

Co-sponsor Sixteen: Respect Life Ministry
There are several different groups that are named “Respect Life Ministry”. They are in different states. Some are in the same state, but different cities. “The Pill Kills” website didn’t link to the Respect Life Ministry that is their co-sponsor. There is no way to discern which of the many groups by this name is the correct one. This means that I cannot find any specific information about the Respect Life Ministry that is the co-sponsor of “The Pill Kills”. I am going to call this one “inconclusive”.

Co-sponsor Seventeen: Stop Planned Parenthood International
Hold on a second, here! Earlier in this post, I noted that the Pro-Life Education Association, (which I called PLEA B, for sake of clarity), became associated with American Life League on December 11, 1989. I noted that their Facebook page had more than one link that went to STOPP. I learned that if you go to the STOPP website, and try to contact them, you can send a letter to “Stop Planned Parenthood c/o American Life League”. I learned that Rita Diller is the National Director of American Life League’s Stop Planned Parenthood project. I noted that she is the person who sent me an email when I contacted “The Pill Kills”.

Now, I learn that Stop Planned Parenthood International is also listed as a co-sponsor for “The Pill Kills”. Add this one to the list of co-sponsors that are associated with, affiliated with, or directly connected to American Life League, the sponsor of “The Pill Kills”. That brings the total to five.

Stop Planned Parenthood International is also called STOPP. The words around their logo say “American Life League’s STOPP International”. There is no doubt that this group is directly connected with American Life League.

It doesn’t have an About Page. It does have a page called The Plan. It gives many details about their campaign to attempt to stop Planned Parenthood. There are several places throughout the STOPP website that mention Planned Parenthood and abortion.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

STOPP is not a University, and it is not a government. There are no credentials on their website, so it is not a professional organization. It does not appear to be selling a product, so it is not a commercial host. I do not think it is a publisher. It is an advocacy group.

* “What are their biases?”
STOPP has two biases. They have a very strong pro-life bias. They are very strongly biased against the Planned Parenthood organization.

Co-sponsor Eighteen: The Movement for a Better America
Movement for a Better America does not have an About page. If you scroll down a bit, it says this:

Dennis Howard is founder and president of The Movement for a Better America, a non-profit, pro-life educational organization. Before starting MBA in 1995, he had a long and successful career in journalism and creative marketing. He helped launch more than 20 magazines and newspapers, and participated in major campaigns for companies like Waring, Cessna, Toshiba, Matchbox, AT&T and others. He is available as a strategic marketing consultant to other pro-life organizations, and is currently writing a book on Pro-Life Strategies for the 21st Century.

The Movement for a Better America is connected to the Tea Party, (which is a conservative political organization). The website has information about how to connect with Dennis Howard if you want to hire him as a speaker. There is a donate button in between some of the posts on that website, (that appears twice). There is a donate link in the sidebar. And, in case you missed it, he is also writing a book on Pro-Life Strategies for the 21st Century.

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

Movement for a Better America is not a University. It is not a government. It is not a professional organization. If Dennis Howard is self-publishing his book, then he is acting as a publisher.

This website is being used to sell a service. You can pay to have Dennis Howard come speak. The website mentions Dennis Howard’s upcoming book, and the only reason someone will do that on a website that has donate links scattered all over it is in the hopes that people will buy the book. That makes Movement for a Better American a commercial host. It is also an advocacy group that is connected with a political advocacy group (the Tea Party), and is pro-life.

* “What are their biases?”
This group has two biases. They have a pro-life bias.
They are also very interested in selling speaking engagements and an upcoming book.

Movement for a Better America has a Facebook page. A total of 7 postings on their Facebook page contain links to articles from Movement for a Better America.

A total of 4 postings contain links to articles from a website called LifeNews dot com. Right to Life of the Central Coast had 6 postings to links from Life News dot com on their Facebook page.

Co-sponsor Nineteen: The Right to Know
“The Pill Kills” did not link to any of the groups that are on their list of co-sponsors. Therefore, I cannot be certain which of the many groups that use “Right to Know” in their name is the one that “The Pill Kills” has as a co-sponsor.

Is it The Right to Know Network, that has data about environmental topics, superfund sites, regulations, and toxic chemicals? Is it Utah’s Right to Know website, that has information about salaries, crimes, sex offenders, traffic accidents, divorces, casualties, and more? Is it the Florida Has A Right to Know website, that wants people to know where every taxpayer dollar is spent? I have no idea. This one is also “inconclusive”.

Here is a summary of what I learned about this group of co-sponsors:

* PLEA (Pro-Life Education Association) – Advocacy group with a strong pro-life bias. Became associated with American Life League on December 11, 1989
* Pro-Life Wisconsin – A political and social advocacy group with a strong pro-life bias
* Right to Life of the Central Coast – Advocacy group with a strong pro-life bias. Became an affiliate of American Life League on March 2, 2012.
* St. Gerard Campus, Inc. – Advocacy group for pregnant teenagers and has a pro-life bias. Became an associate of American Life League on August 13, 2011. Sells a residency program for pregnant teenagers, and charges tuition for the school.
* Respect Life Ministry – Inconclusive. Could not find information that clearly indicated which of the many groups with that name “The Pill Kills” website intended to identify as a co-sponsor
* Stop Planned Parenthood International – Advocacy group with a strong pro-life bias. Is strongly biased against Planned Parenthood. Is directly connected to American Life League.
* The Movement for a Better America – Advocacy group connected to The Tea Party, and that has a pro-life bias. Is selling speaking engagements, and has a book coming out
* The Right to Know – Inconclusive. I could not find information that clearly indicated which of the many groups with this name that the “The Pill Kills” website intended to identify as a co-sponsor.

I know that this is a ton of information to process. My next blog will be an easy to read summary of who the sponsor and co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills” website are. The United Nations said, in Criteria One of their “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources”, that you need to know who is hosting the website that you are evaluating. The summary will make it easier for everyone to know that information about “The Pill Kills”.

This is the third blog in a series where I am evaluating a website called “The Pill Kills”. In this blog, I will continue to use the first criteria set from the United Nation’s United Nation’s “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources” as a guide to ensure a consistent set of tools that I can use as I learn about each of the co-sponsors.

Criteria One: Accuracy
In short, this says that you need to look at who is hosting the website that you are evaluating. “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?” You should ask “What are their biases?” Remember to verify the information on that website with information found in other sources”.

I have already learned about the first five groups listed as Co-sponsors. I will continue from there.

Co-sponsor Six: Focus Pregnancy Help Center
Focus Pregnancy Help Center is part of an organization called Rochester Pro Life dot org. The website notes that they are “two doors down from Planned Parenthood”. Their mission statement reads:

To appropriately face the reality of abortion. To respond with urgency to the immediate need to save a life. To counsel through verbal interaction, literature, and photographic images. Our mission is to provide a life-giving solution to all women & girls contemplating abortion. To help them to choose life and to supply the support & referrals that they need with love.

* “Are they a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”

Focus Pregnancy Help Center is not a University. It is not a government. There are no credentials on their website to indicate that they are a professional organization. All their services are free, so they are not a commercial host. It is unclear if they are the publisher of whatever printed information that they might be distributing.

They are an advocacy group. Their website url includes “prolife”. Their mission is to provide information to women and girls that are contemplating abortion, and to help them to choose life.

* “What is their bias?”
They are an advocacy group that has a pro-life bias.

There are a list of links on their website of the many services they offer. One link goes nowhere. The rest link to a Wikipedia page that says “Unable to proceed”, and “Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact title”.

Co-sponsor seven: Life and Family Advocates
This is a bit unclear. Again, the list of co-sponsors does not have links to the websites of any of them. The best I can do is attempt to find it by doing a Google search. Unfortunately, the search didn’t come up with a clear answer as to who this group is supposed to be.

There is an organization called “National Institute of Family and Life Advocates”, who uses the acronym NIFLA. But, “The Pill Kills” website didn’t say NIFLA. I see a link to a “Family Advocacy Center”, a “Family Advocacy Program”, and “Family Advocates”, but it is not clear which of them is connected to “The Pill Kills”. This means that I cannot learn about this group, whoever they are. I’m going to call this one “inconclusive”.

Co-sponsor Eight: LifeSource Ministries
My best guess is that LifeSource Ministries is an organization that is interested in helping people to find spiritual renewal within the church. It is clearly a Christian organization. It offers Renewal Conferences that are specifically designed for a format of one service, one day, multi-service, or a multi-day conference. It also offers Spiritual Coaching. There is no fee for the coaching services, but donations are appreciated.

* “Are they a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”

LifeSource Ministries is not a University, or a government. There are not credentials on the website that indicate that it is a professional association.

Are they a commercial host or a publisher? Maybe. They are providing coaching services and conferences, (and donations are appreciated). Are they an advocacy group? It doesn’t appear so. This is the first co-sponsor on the list that did not specifically use the word “abortion” on their website. Nothing on their website mentions pregnancy, or birth control. Perhaps I have not found the right group that is going by the name “LifeSource Ministries”?

* “What is their bias?”
They are a Christian organization.

Co-sponsor Nine: Mother and Unborn Baby Care, Inc.
This is another one that is not easy to find. It appears that there are Mother and Unborn Baby Care, Inc., groups in several states. Which one is connected to “The Pill Kills”?

I found a newsletter for Mother and Unborn Baby Care, Inc., in Michigan. It describes itself as:

Mother and Unborn Baby Care, Inc. is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) tax deductible organization whose mission is saving babies from abortion.

The newsletter is only a few pages long. Page four contains a long, full page, blog about how to donate to Mother and Unborn Baby Care, Inc. It points out that almost every gift comes with certain tax benefits, and that sometimes you can receive more than just a tax donation. They have information about a conference they are holding called “Leaving a Legacy for Life through planned Giving”. Page five has a url where you can go to donate. It says “Secure online donations available!” The last page has two upcoming events that you can buy tickets for.

* “Are they a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”

Mother and Unborn Baby Care Inc., is not a University. It is not a government. There is nothing on their newsletter that says that they are a professional association.

It appears that they may be a commercial host. They are certainly interested in letting people know about all the ways that a person can give money to their organization. I don’t think they are a publisher, and it does not appear that they are, primarily, an advocacy group.

* “What is their bias?”
Clearly, their bias is towards letting people know how to give them money. They also note, in tiny print, that their mission is saving babies from abortion. Therefore, they have a pro-life bias.

Co-sponsor Ten: Old Brooklyn Pro-Life Association
This is interesting! The very first link that comes up in the Google Search for Old Brooklyn Pro-Life Association brings me directly back to “The Pill Kills” website.

Click Here to see the Google search results that I got. The next link is to a group called “American Life League- Associations”. The page was published on August 21, 2006. It says “Please join me in welcoming the newest addition to our Associate Program – Old Brooklyn Pro-Life Association”. Does this organization actually exist today? I cannot find anything that tells me, well, anything, about this group. I’m going to call this one “inconclusive”.

Co-sponsor Eleven: Pharmacists for Life International
Pharmacists for Life International website is a bit confusing. Their introduction reads:

Welcome to pfli.org, the only website serving the profession of pharmacy as a totally 100% pro-life philosophy! All the pro-life pharmacy news and information that is fit to print and that the “drive-by” pharmacy media choose to ignore or misreport.

They have a donate button sitting right next to a link to a petition they want people to sign. They point out that you can support PFLI by purchasing flowers from Pro-Life Flowers, which is a division of PFLI. There is a rotating red button in the sidebar that says “NEW!” and is sitting next to a link that reads “Put PFLI in Your Will”.

Scroll down a bit further, there is a section of the blog that says: “DONATE TODAY….PFLI is relying on you” and continues “Please help us carry on our apostolate in 2011 to protect the innocent pre born and defend the pharmacist rights of conscience.” I am a bit confused by this, because we are four months into 2012. 2011 is over. When was this website last updated? Oh, and in the sidebar near this information is another link to where you can donate to their PayPal account.

* “Are they a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”

PFLI is not a University. They are not a government. The do not appear to have any credentials that indicate that they are a professional association.

Are they a commercial host? Yes. They are selling flowers. Are they an advocacy group? Yes. They want to protect the “pre born” and to defend pharmacist’s rights of conscience. Are they a publisher? I do not think so.

* “What is their bias?”
They have a bias towards protection the pre born and defending pharmicist’s rights of conscience. They have a very clear and obvious interest in letting people know exactly how to send them some money.

There are more co-sponsors, but, I am going to put them into the next blog, because this is getting long. Here is what I learned about this group of co-sponsors:

* Focus Pregnancy Help Center – Advocate group with pro-life bias
* Family and Life Advocates – inconclusive. It is unclear which of the groups with similar sounding names are really a co-sponsor of “The Pill Kills”.
* LifeSource Ministries – Christian group. Doesn’t mention anything about abortion or birth control.
* Mother and Unborn Baby Care, Inc. – Very interested in letting people know the ways that you can give them money. Seems to be a pro-life advocacy group.
* Old Brooklyn Pro-Life Association – Inconclusive. There is no evidence that proves that this organization still exists.
* Pharmacists for Life International – They are selling flowers. They have several obvious places on their website that you can click on in order to send them money. They might be an advocacy group the pre born and for pharmacist’s rights of conscience.

The next blog will finish taking a look at the co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills”. After that, I will start delving into the links that are underneath the articles on their website, (that don’t have any author’s names listed).

This is the second part in a series of blogs where I review, and evaluate, the information presented on a website called: The Pill Kills. I am using the United Nation’s “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources” as the basis for my evaluation of “The Pill Kills” website.

I started this by doing an overall review of the entire website. You can read it here.

As promised in the previous blog, I will now learn about the co-sponsors of the “The Pill Kills” website. While writing the first blog, it became clear that the sponsor of that website is an advocacy group called the American Life League. All of the information that appears on “The Pill Kills” website, and the information in the side bar, comes from the American Life League. They are a group that has a very strong pro-life bias.

I will be using the first criteria from the UN’s “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources” as I take a look at the many co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills” website. Criteria two, criteria three, criteria four, and criteria five will not be used in this portion of the evaluation because they are designed to evaluate an entire website. My purpose for this blog is to learn more about the groups that co-sponsor “The Pill Kills” website. It is not to do a complete, systematic, evaluation of each of the co-sponsor’s websites.

I will not plagiarize the UN’s website by copying and pasting their article about “Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources” into this blog. There is a link in the first paragraph of this blog that will take you directly to the UN’s page, if you wish to read it. What I will do is copy and paste my summarization of the first criteria here, to make it easier for readers to follow along.

Criteria 1: Accuracy
In short, this says that you need to look at who is hosting the website that you are evaluating. “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?” You should ask “What are their biases?” Remember to verify the information on that website with information found in other sources.

Here is the Home page of “The Pill Kills”. On the side, you can see a box that lists several co-sponsors of the site. These are the co-sponsors for 2012. It appears that if you would like your site to also be a co-sponsor, that you can email “The Pill Kills” website. I will learn about each co-sponsor individually. At first glance, I believe I will need to make more than one blog about this, in order to cover them all. There are a lot!

Co-Sponsor One: AMEN
AMEN is an acronym that stands for “Abortion Must End Now”. They don’t have a page that is called an “About Page”. However, they do have a mission statement. You can read the entire thing on their website. Part of it says:

“By the grace of God and the intercession of the Immaculate Virgin Mary, AMEN is a single issue group focused on defending the Sanctity of Life. AMEN exists to defend every life from the moment of conception to natural death and to put an end to abortion once and for all. As long as we draw breath, we will do everything in our power to accomplish these goals. We are opposed to the destruction of human life in all its stages. Thus, we believe that any attack on innocent human life from its beginning until the moment of natural death is unethical. There are no exceptions.”

* “Is the co-sponsor a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?

AMEN is not a University. It is not a government. There isn’t any information on this website that lists credentials, so it is not a professional association.

Is it a commercial host? Not exactly. There is a link on the page that says “Great Books”. This goes to a page called “Carmen Marcoux Books”. There is an image of the books, and a description of them. Part of the text reads:

“Please purchase books – As many as you can afford – and pass them around!”

You cannot purchase the books directly through AMEN. Instead, there is a URL at the bottom of the page that leads to One Way Publishing House The books are about something called “Christian Courtship”.

What is that? According to a link on the One Way Publishing House website, Christian Courtship includes concepts such as: dating only one person at a time, dating only because you are seriously considering marrying that person, chastity, purity, and a lot of family involvement in the courtship.

A Google search did not turn up any direct links between AMEN, One Way Publishing House, Carmen Marcoux Books, or Carmen Marcoux herself. It appears that AMEN is not, themselves, a publisher.

It is very clear that AMEN is an advocacy group. According to the Free Dictionary Dot Com, the definition of Advocacy group is the same as the definition for “interest group”. It reads:

“A group of persons working on behalf of or strongly supporting a particular cause, such as an item of legislation, an industry, or a special segment of society”.

* “What are their biases?”
AMEN is a group that has a strong pro-life bias. They also have a bias in favor of Christian Courtship.

Co-Sponsor Two: American Life League
Now, wait a minute! I’ve already learned about this advocacy group. They are the one’s whose logo appears at the bottom of each and every page in “The Pill Kills” website, right next to their name. There is a copyright symbol at the bottom of each page. The About Page for “The Pill Kills” asks people to join with American Life League for their June protest of the birth control pill. They certainly appear to be a Sponsor, not a Co-Sponsor. And yet, there they are, listed in the box that say “COSPONSORS”. This is a bit confusing.

Co-Sponsor Three: Right to Life Education Fund

I am unable to find a webpage for this group. The co-sponors are listed in a box, but clicking on them does nothing because they are not connected to links to the group’s website. When I put “Right to Life Education Fund” into Google, I got several different links that had some variation of that phrase.

Most appeared to be connected to a particular state. It is unclear if the Tennessee Right to Life Education Fund is connected to the Oregon Right to Life Educational Foundation, or if either are connected with the Wisconsin Right to Life Education Fund, or North Carolina Right to Life.

There is no way to know which of these potential groups, (or the ones that I did not specifically list here) are actually the co-sponsor for “The Pill Kills”. Google did not bring up a link to a national organization called “Right to Life Education Fund”. There is no way to learn anything about this group. I don’t think they are a government, but this is all I can discern without having facts.

Co-sponsor Four: Cherish Life Ministries
The About Page for Cherish Life Ministries includes the following sentence:

“Approximately 70% of the abortions performed in this country are on Christian women.”

There is no link to indicate where this percentage came from, or what group did the research that came to this conclusion. I will not copy and past their entire About Page into my blog, but I will include a few paragraphs that describe what Cherish Life Ministries is.

“Cherish Life Ministries, A Call to The Church, is meant to help churches recognize they should all have a Life Ministry and the representatives of the ministry are missionaries of the church. It is time for church leaders to tell their congregations the truth of abortion and they should lead their church members to help end it.

Cherish Life Ministries began with a vision to create ongoing Life Ministries within churches and local communities across the United States. We do so by providing internet marketing technology, pro-life resources and educational materials, along with support forums to individuals and churches as members of Cherish Life Ministries.”

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, and advocacy group, a publisher?”

Cherish Life Ministries is not a University. It is not a government. I do not see any credential that would indicate that it is a professional organization.

Is it a commercial host? I think that it might fit that description. Their About Page says: “We do so by providing internet marketing technology, pro-life resources and educational materials, along with support forums to individuals and churches as members of Cherish Life Ministries”. They are either selling this service, or they are giving it away for free. It is possible to contact them through their website if you want to sign up for their resources. The page also asks people to support Cherish Life Ministries by becoming a sponsor.

Are they an advocacy group? Yes. Their about page says “It is time for church leaders to tell their congregations the truth about abortion and they should lead their church members to end it”.

Are they a publisher? It appears that they are creating, producing, and distributing tools, resources, and support materials of information and content that they own. It certainly sounds like what a publisher does.

* “What are their biases?”
Cherish Life Ministries is biased. They are pro-life. They also have an interest in being able provide their internet marketing service, and their published pro-life materials, to churches and individuals.

Co-sponsor Five: Children of God for Life
Children of God for Life has a description that reads “World Leaders of the Campaign For Ethical Vaccines, Medicines and Consumer Products”. There are not links to anywhere that can back up this claim. They appear to be an aggregator. By this, I mean it looks as though this website collects up news articles from other websites, and links to them on their own website.

They do not have an About Page, but they do have a “Company” Page. It reads:

“Children of God for Life is a Pro-Life Outreach Source Designed To…
- Provide Truthful, Accurate and Updated Information
- Research Facts For You
- Educate The Public
- Provide Seminars and Training”

There is a link that you can click on if you want to make an on-line tax deductible donation to them. Or, there is another link on another page that asks you do donate directly to Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute. This page emphasizes that your donations to Children of God for Life are 100% tax deductible.

The Vice-President of Pro-Life Activities at Children of God for Life is Judie Brown. She is the founder of American Life League (the sponsor of “The Pill Kills”).

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”

Children of God For Life is not a University. It is not a government. It does not have any credentials on its website that would indicate that it is a professional organization.

Is it a commercial host? It certainly appears to be one. They provide seminars and training. They ask for donations in several places on their website. If they are providing seminars and training, then it is reasonable to conclude that they could be publishing the materials that are used in those seminars and trainings. That would mean they are a publisher.

Are they an advocacy group? Yes. Take a quick look at the types of articles that they have aggregated onto their website. Many are pro-life. Others are anti-vaccines. They also have Judie Brown founder of American Life League, (which is a strongly pro-life organization), as their Vice-President of Pro-Life Activities.

* “What are their biases?”
They are pro-life. They are anti-vaccine. They are very interested in providing seminars and trainings.

I have now learned about the first five co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills”, as listed on their about page in a box marked “COSPONSORS”. Here are the facts so far:

* AMEN: Advocacy group with pro-life bias
* American Life League: Advocacy group with pro-life bias, (also clearly the sponsor of “The Pill Kills” website).
* Right to Life Education – inconclusive. No information found
* Cherish Life Ministries – Advocacy group with pro-life bias. Interested in providing internet marketing technology, pro-life resources and educational materials.
* Children of God For Life – Advocacy group that has a pro-life bias. Interested in providing seminars and training. Has Judie Brown, the founder of American Life League, involved in their organization.

Very interesting! I will go over the next group of cosponsors in an upcoming blog.

Usually, when I post something on this blog, it is about my own, personal, experiences with unemployment. This post, however, has nothing to do with unemployment. This will be a very long post.

I came across a website the other day (which I found from a link that someone posted in Facebook). The website is called “The Pill Kills”. They are advocating a “Protest the Pill Day”.

I read over the information on their website. At first read, I found it to be biased, and unscientific. In short, it certainly appeared to me that this website was trying to take one example (or a few examples) of instances where it seemed as though a women died due to using birth control pills, and extrapolate from there that ALL women who use birth control pills will, in fact, die in the exact same manner.

At the side, there is a poll. It asks “Are you going to participate?” You can click a box that says “yes” or a box that says “no”. I, of course, clicked “no”. To my surprise, something popped up that asked me to give my reasons about why I would not be attending. There was an email to send it to.

So, I did. Here is the exact wording of the email that I sent:

To whom it may concern,

When I clicked “No” on your website, it said to email you with the reasons why I will not be attending.

Here are my reasons:

I do not support your cause. I strongly believe that women, including teenagers, should have access to birth control if they wish to use it. I believe that by specifically and intentionally preventing women’s access to birth control, as your protest is attempting to do, it harms women. Women, and most teens, are perfectly capable of making their own decisions about their choices of health care, especially when they are consulting with a doctor about it. Birth control is part of women’s health care. The federal government included birth control coverage into the category of preventative care that all health insurance companies are required to cover.

I do not think the information on your website is scientifically accurate. You cannot take a few instances of situations where a person had a negative side effect to a particular medication, any medication, and extrapolate from that one example that ALL people will experience the exact same negative side effect, to the same degree, as the one person in the example did. It that method were scientifically valid, then companies who make prescription medications would never have to spend the money it takes to do drug trials, and the FDA would never bother looking at any medications. They could just point at one person who didn’t have a bad side effect and assume that the drug is safe for everyone.

Your website provides scare tactics intended to disuade uneducated women from using a medication that could save their lives, that could improve their quality of live, and that could improve their family’s quality of life. I do not support organizations that set out to encourage people to do something that is against the person’s best interest.

I think it is negligent for your organization to encourage women to not use birth control and not, at the same time, fund programs to help teenage mothers, or mothers who are low-income, to raise a child. Lack of access to birth control is the biggest reason why women end up with unwanted pregnancies when they cannot afford to raise a child, when they lack family or social support to help them raise a child, and when they are in situations that would be a really bad idea to attempt to raise a child in.

I highly doubt anyone at your organization will read this, but, I figured I’d give you the benefit of the doubt.

Please stop trying to push your own, personal, religious viewpoints regarding women’s health care on the rest of us.

Then, I sent the email. I honestly didn’t expect that anyone would bother to read over my reasons, much less respond to them. However, I got a response. I would love to be able to post that response in this blog, word for word, as I did with my initial email. However, the fine print at the bottom of the emailed response I received contains wording to the effect that if I post, or directly copy, or forward that email, or portions of that email, that …. I assume they can decide to sue me.

Instead, I will note that in this email, the sender asked me to take the time to read the medical studies and other information on their website, and insisted that there was no deception on their part.

I doubt that the sender of the email would have any way to know that I happen to be a professional freelance writer. I spend several hours every day sifting through websites in order to check facts and to make sure that the source I am using is a reliable one. My original intent when I sent the email about why I would not be attending their protest was simply to share my views with them. But, now that I been asked to review the information on their website… I believe that I will take them up on that request.

Criteria Used in Evaluating Web Resources

I decided that it would be a good idea to locate a consistent method to help me evaluate the sources that I find on “The Pill Kills” website. The best resource I could find comes from the website of the United Nations. They have a list of “five traditional criteria, used to determine the quality of print information in libraries” and note that it can also be applied to the evaluation of web resources.

I’m not going to plagerize the entire page that I found at the the United Nations. If you want to read the entire thing, you can. Just click the link I put in the above paragraph where it says “United Nations”. For the purposes of this blog, I will summarize.

Criteria 1: Accuracy
In short, this says that you need to look at who is hosting the website that you are evaluating. “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?” You should ask “What are their biases?” Remember to verify the information on that website with information found in other sources.

Criteria 2: Authority
Try to find information about the author, (or contributors). Check to see if the webpages include references. “A good website should provide a way to contact the producers of the site”. Determine where the website is getting their information from. In short, check the sources, and check the qualifications of the author / contributors.

Criteria 3: Objectivity
Check if advertising and informational content are being supplied by the same person or organization. Examine if there is a bias in the informational content.

Criteria 4: Currency
When was the website last updated? In some cases, older information may not be accurate. Look for broken links, which indicate that the page has been abandoned. How often are new links added to the website?

Criteria 5: Coverage
Compare the information found on the website that you are evaluating with the information found on other websites.

Now that I have a reliable, consistent, set of criteria to use, I can evaluate how factual the information presented on “The Pill Kills” website actually is. I can also use this criteria to evaluate the links that are listed on the website (the ones that are being presented as factual, reliable, accurate, resources).

Start From the Start
To begin, it makes the most sense to evaluate “The Pill Kills” website itself first, and then dig into individual links.

Here is my evaluation of the overall website called “The Pill Kills”:

Criteria One: Accuracy
* Who is hosting this website?
The About page, and the bottom of each page within the website, lists the American Life League. There are also several co-sponsors, (which I will get to in an upcoming blog).

* “Is it a University, a government, a professional association, a commercial host, an advocacy group, a publisher?”
Here is where to find the About Page for the American Life League. It is not a University, or a government. I don’t see any credentials that indicate that it is a professional organization. I don’t see a place to purchase things from on their website, so I can conclude that they are not a commercial host. I don’t see links to books they have published, or anything that indicates that it is a magazine, so it is not a publisher.

However, the information on their About page makes it clear that they are an advocacy group. According to the Free Dictionary dot com, the definition of Advocacy Group is the same as the definition of “Interest Group”. It reads:

“A group of persons working on behalf of or strongly supporting a particular cause, such as an item of legislation, an industry, or a special segment of society”.

I am not going to copy the entire About page from the American Life League. If you would like to read it, click the link I provided above (where it says “About Page” in the first paragraph under the question that starts with “Is it a University…). However, I will quote one paragraph from it:

“In a nutshell, American Life League is a 501(c)(3) organization co-founded in 1979 by Judie Brown and nine other dedicated pro-life Americans. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life education organization in the United States. ALL is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. It is rooted in pro-life integrity that stands up for every innocent human being whose life is threatened by what Pope John Paul II called “the culture of death.” That ranges from the single cell human embryo to the elderly, the infirm and others at risk of having their life terminated by acts of euthanasia. The pro-life position notes that neither abortion nor euthanasia can ever be medically necessary or morally permitted.

* What are their biases?
If you read the entire About Page from the American Life League, it is easy to see that they have a very strong bias. They are strongly pro-life. Their website puts the phrase “pro-choice” in quotes (just like I have done here), but they do not put the phrase pro-life in quotes. They refer to people who do not share their view as “perplexed”.

From this, I conclude that the American Life League is a biased group.

I will return to the co-sponsors of “The Pill Kills” website after I finish evaluating the website itself.

Criteria 2: Authority
* Try to find information about the author, (or contributors).

The article called “How the Pill Kills” does not list an author’s name.
The article called “Side Effects” does not list an author’s name.
The article called “The History of the Pill” does not list an author’s name.
The article called “Talking Points” does not list an author’s name.
The article called “ALL’s Map Room” does not list an author’s name.

There is no way to find out the reliability or authority of the authors who wrote the articles on this website. No one attached their name to the articles. Therefore, the knowledge, expertise, or authority of the authors cannot be verified.

* “A good website should provide a way to contact the producers of the site”
If you go to the Home page, there is a link called “Contact Us!”. If you click on it, it brings up a form where you can put your name, your email address, and your message. It also has the phone number and fax number of the American Life League, and a mailing address for it.

It would be nice to know the names of the authors of the articles on the website. The American Life League is an organization. It appears that, perhaps, someone within it wrote the articles. Why isn’t his or her name attached to them?

Criteria 3: Objectivity
* Are advertising and informational content being supplied by the same person or organization?”

I have already determined that “The Pill Kills” is being sponsored by the American Life League. It appears that the articles, or informational content, is supplied by them as well.

There are no specific advertisements on the website, if by “advertisements” you mean “a product that is being sold”. However, there are several links in the sidebar. They are called: “Summary ’11 The Pill Kills Marriage”, “Summary ’10 The Pill Kills the Environment”, “Summary ’09 The Pill Kills Women” and “Summary ’08 The Pill Kills Babies”. Every single one of these links has the logo and name of the American Life League at the bottom of the page.

It also has a box that shows a drawing of Mary and Baby Jesus. The text next to the box reads: “Our Lady of Life, please stop Planned Parenthood”. Underneath is a link that says “click to find out more”. Once again, the bottom of that page also has the logo and name of the American Life League.

Conclusion: The articles, and the links in the sidebar, are all supplied by the exact same organization.

* “Examine if their is a bias in informational content”.
I’ve already determined that the American Life League is biased. I will go over each, individual article, in an upcoming blog.

Criteria 4: Currency
* “When was the website last updated?”
The articles on this website do not have publishing dates attached to them. There is no way to know, for certain, when the website was last updated.

As far as determining if there are lots of broken links, I will save that part for an upcoming blog where I go over smaller portions of “The Pill Kills” website in more detail.

Criteria 5: Coverage
* Compare the information that you find on this website with what you find on other websites.
I will be covering this, in great detail, in upcoming blogs.

Overall Conclusion, Based on the Five Criteria

Criteria One: “The Pill Kills” is sponsored by the American Life League, which is an advocacy with a strong pro-life bias.

Criteria Two: “The Pill Kills” does not list the names of the authors of the articles that appear on its website. This means there is no way to verify the authority, expertise, or anything else about the authors.
They do have a contact link, which will connect you to the American Life League.

Criteria Three: The information in the articles, and in the links on the sidebar, all come from the same source : the American Life League.

Criteria Four: There are no dates of publication attached to the articles in this website. There is no way to tell how old the information actually is. As far as the potential of broken links, I will be going over that in an upcoming blog.

Criteria Five: I will be going over the information in the articles, and their sources, in great detail in an upcoming blog.

At this time, “The Pill Kills” does not appear to be a reliable source of factual information.