For example, the editors noted the paper has supported animal rights groups’ undercover exposés of practices at California farms. In 2015, local officials pressed animal cruelty charges against a Fresno poultry worker after the group Mercy for Animals released an undercover video shot at the farm.
The activists with hidden cameras didn’t face charges.
In CMP’s case, Daleiden and Merritt recorded conversations with individuals in pro-abortion groups in an attempt to expose the illegal sale of aborted baby parts. Since California is one of 11 states where both parties must consent to recording private conversations, the attorney general contends the pair violated the law. Daleiden’s attorney says since the recorded conversations occurred in crowded public settings, the discussions weren’t confidential.
Officials at Planned Parenthood hailed the charges against the pro-life pair, but pro-abortion groups have used similar undercover tactics against pro-life groups for years.
In Florida and Virginia, undercover activists used hidden cameras to record conversations at pregnancy care centers. When a reporter from the website Vice asked one activist how she faked pregnancy when visiting the centers, the activist bragged she brought urine from pregnant women.
In California, the abortion giant NARAL conducted a yearlong undercover investigation of dozens of pregnancy care centers in California. The group underscored its workers didn’t record conversations. Instead, NARAL trained volunteers to visit care centers and ask questions about abortion. After the visits, the volunteers (reportedly including at least one teenager) wrote down their versions of encounters.
NARAL used the self-reported accounts to claim pregnancy care centers regularly lie to women. Among the complaints: 70 percent of the pro-life workers called the fetus a baby. The report lamented that when women asked about their options, “the response from CPCs was frightening in its consistency: ‘You should have a baby no matter what.’”