The headline of the article reads “Anti-abortion group uses gruesome images to target ridings of MPs who voted against pro-life motion.” An article about my friend Stephanie Gray’s latest campaign, which juxtaposes the faces of pro-choice MPs against pictures of dead babies.
I have my issues with the campaign. I am not confident that the images without the voices of Stephanie and her team are a win. So while I don’t have a problem with the use of graphic images, I do believe there should be a person there to discuss those images when people inevitably have a strong reaction.
However, at the end of the day, I do agree with Stephanie on this:
I’m 100% confident that we’ll win,” she says.
The future is pro-life, folks, of that I am confident.
Finally, no pro-life group garners more attention for the problem of abortion in our culture like Stephanie’s. And for that, I continue to be grateful. It’s not an issue to be complacent over, that’s for sure.
by 
I see what you’re saying about the images without the voices. Not all of the CCBR’s projects have direct dialogue involved — e.g. the truck campaign, highway project, or postcards — but I think they do aim to get the argument through alongside via the inclusion and phone numbers and URLs (though, in this instance, it’s the politician’s phone number). I’m not sure that most people would call or visit the website, but many do, and that’s an opportunity for engagement. (I recall hearing some voicemail messages of people who called to yell at them, heard a pre-recorded voicemail message, and by the time the beep came along, their tone had changed.)
The sense I get is that, at the end of the day, it’s a tradeoff between reaching a wider number of people with those less dialogue-focused projects who might not be reached at all otherwise, versus only reaching the number of people you can dialogue with. I’d agree that the projects that are focused on dialogue might lead to a higher quality of engagement, but I’m interested to see more innovation in a wider variety of projects, and attempts to introduce some sort of dialogue or argument into projects targeted at more of a mass audience…
I’m not sure what the answer is, and I think your point is important, but I’m interested in the ways they try to bridge the gap between reaching a larger audience and still allowing for some engagement. I’m sure there’s room for improvement, but I think it can still be worthwhile.