Gosnell is the abortionist charged with killing one woman and 7 babies in Philadelphia.  That's more deaths than Jared Loughner is responsible for in Tucson.  And these killings were arguably far more gruesome and horror filled.

We were awash in Tucson shooting stories even weeks after the actual killings.  Contrast that with the coverage being given the Gosnell murders.  Or better yet, allow The Anchoress to do it for you:

Do a quick run-through of the search engines. Beyond some perfunctory coverage on the day the Gosnell story broke, there has been little attention paid, no follow-up by the mainstream media. This is an ugly story; it touches too many social shibboleths and indicts too many philosophies. The press wants Kermit Gosnell and his scissors to go away, and to that end they are simply not talking about him.

So, allow me to ask the impolitic question I have hinted at elsewhere: in choosing to look away, in choosing to under-report, in choosing to spin, minimize, excuse, and move-along when it comes to Kermit Gosnell--and to this whole subject of under-regulated abortion clinics, the debasement of women and the slaughter of living children--how are the press and those they protect by their silence any better than the Catholic bishops who, in decades past, looked away, under-reported, spun, minimized, excused, moved-along, and protected the repulsive predator-priests who have stolen innocence and roiled the community of faith?

The press was quite right (and duty-bound) to report on the shameful failures of our bishops and the sins of our priests. They reported; they followed up. They dug through records. They sought out histories. They looked for more, because they understood that if filth existed in one diocese, it likely existed in others. They courageously did their jobs, unworried about fallout or repercussions; they were looking at a big issue, and were thus unintimidated by big names, and rightly unreserved in their outrage.

They pulled neither punches nor headlines. They even dared to peer at the very uppermost seats of authority and leadership, to see if there was any culpability, there--any mismanagement, any looking-away.

In the wake of Kermit Gosnell, however, in the wake of Andrew Rutland, Stephen Brigham, and Abu Hayat, there is no following-up, no digging through records; there is no curiosity about filthy, women-maiming, spine-snipping facilities existing in other cities; there are no big names to go to for quotes. These crimes--when they are covered at all--are treated like "local" aberrations. No one peers in at authority or examines the pro-abortion leadership. There is no one in government, apparently, to ask about criminal-neglect, lack of scrutiny; no one to accuse of mismanagement or of looking-away.

The mainstream press, made uncomfortable by a 261-page grand jury report detailing what might well be called a decades-long and heinous crime against humanity, abetted by the spectacularly willful looking-away of those in authority, itself turns away from the story and neglects its duty to the public trust.

In doing so they bring to mind the words of Saint Paul to the Romans: "The evil which I hate, that I do."

A guy walks up to a Congresswoman and pumps a bullet into her head and understandably, the coverage of this event garners plenty of ink for weeks.  A guy severs the spinal cords of 7 babies in a filthy clinic for immigrants and the poor, kills a woman with an overdose of anesthesia and pain killers and oversees an office filled with jars of severed baby's feet and despite evidence that officialdom looked the other way for far too long, the story disappears down a media black hole in a matter of days.

Welcome to mainstream media coverage where only the news that fits the meme is fit to print.