The pro-abortion movement would like to prevent any humanization or features of person-hood applied to the baby growing inside a woman. They don't want the abortion consumer to have any moral hurdles to jump through and it's easier for abortion providers to do their job when they think the baby is only a clump of cells or an appendage of the mother. It's not hard to imagine Nazi's in charge of gas chambers thinking something similar about all the Jews they killed.
Back in the 70's and 80's the discussion on abortion was limited to face to face conversation, TV, newspapers and magazines. Now the debate rages on over the world wide web. The number of pro-abortion sites have reached an astronomical proportion and those that want babies to live are few and far between.
When reading an article discussing abortion or a pregnant woman most authors tend to use the term “fetus” to describe the unborn child. They do this for the same reason the pro-abortion movement does it. Almost every author makes clear their position on abortion by using a term that dehumanizes the unborn. This can also work in reverse and using the terms “baby”, “child” or “unborn” can suggest the moral position. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule but those exceptions are rare. They usually include a medical professional or a medical journal since the cold term “fetus” is scientifically correct and factual.
An article's author may try to remain unbiased in reporting but almost always take a pro-abortion position by default. They may not even be aware they are propagating views held by the pro-abortion movement or they might be very aware and their article is intended to change your mind.
Remember this article the next time you read another article where the term “fetus” is used.