The Boston Globe’s big lie

The Boston Globe’s big lie

PE Bias Grade : D

By: Allen Nitschelm on October 17, 2020 | Article Review

This is a review of the following Boston Globe Article:
Article Title President’s lawyers seek a ruling to halt tax record turnover
Date 10/14/2020
Article Link Boston Globe ( Page A8 )
Syndicated From Washington Post
Journalist Unsigned Washington Post article
Article Summary

President Trump criticizes Dr. Fauci and the Boston Globe comes to Fauci’s defense.

Share This Story

The mainstream media has decided President Trump is a liar and uses loaded adjectives to describe his words in order to cast doubt on them and help Joe Biden win the upcoming election.

But when Joe Biden misspeaks, lies, or hides the source of his family’s enrichment while he was serving the country as Vice President, the media ignores, covers-up, or excuses Biden because they don’t want to damage his candidacy. This is clearly “playing favorites” which violates professional journalism. News articles are supposed to be fair and unbiased, and opinions are supposed to be kept on the Editorial pages.

Big Tech has now jumped into this fray. Instead of acting as a neutral platform, sites like Facebook and Twitter appear to be trying to help the Biden campaign by suppressing or calling into question topics that would hurt Biden. If these websites wish to editorialize, then they should be subject to lawsuits related to the content they do publish. They can’t selectively favor certain content and then claim to be just a ‘community billboard’ and not responsible for who posts what.

I see media bias in the Boston Globe nearly every day, and this example is relatively minor but it is straightforward and obvious, so I wanted to highlight it. In it, the article claims that Trump is wrongly suggesting that Dr. Anthony Fauci gave bad advice early-on in the pandemic. Here is the Globe’s account:

‘‘Actually, Tony’s pitching arm is far more accurate than his prognostications,’’ Trump wrote, erroneously suggesting that Fauci’s advice in the early days of the pandemic that the public need not wear face masks meant that the doctor was playing down the virus. (emphasis mine)

But we know from the public record that Dr. Fauci did give advice which contradicts his current advice. He was reportedly against wearing face masks and he reportedly was against the travel ban from China. He later reversed these positions.

The Boston Globe rejects Trump’s history by labeling it “erroneous” when anyone who follows the news knows it is accurate and true. So why would the Globe make such a blatant misrepresentation of these facts?

Dr. Fauci’s reversal in these two instances are also material. The travel ban flattened the curve and likely saved many thousand lives, and the CDC now recommends everyone wear masks, a far cry from saying they were ineffective and their real use was to remind people not to touch their face. Perhaps Fauci should have suggested people tie a string around their finger as a better reminder than wearing a face mask.

So the Boston Globe and their media allies cannot really think that Dr. Fauci has been blameless and the pandemic crisis is all about President Trump not “following the science.” Something else must be at play here, and perhaps it is a version of the “big lie.” The Boston Globe constantly repeats such descriptions of Trump’s statements (like saying they are given “without evidence,” which is their favorite) and readers are thus encouraged to disbelieve anything that Trump says. And this is reinforced by the media’s “fact checkers” which are clearly partisan creations that purport to ‘scientifically’ determine when Trump is lying.

I have read many of these “fact check” stories and at least the ones I’ve read appear to be blatantly false. They often say that Trump’s statements are inconclusive or misleading, and then rate them as untruthful. That is not a logical conclusion one can draw. Another trick they use is to admit that there is some truth, but it is not the full truth–therefore, he is lying. But politicians never tell the “full truth.” They often leave out inconvenient or contrary facts to convince people to believe them. This is normal political discourse, not examples of lies.

Sometimes the media “fact checks” Trump’s jokes. I don’t think their reporters and editors are that stupid, but they are that devious.

These insidious adjectives like “falsely,” “without evidence,” and now “erroneously” seem meant to cast doubt on whatever the President says in what is an obvious attempt to help his opponent. It has also served to divide our country. People who tend to vote for Democrats believe this nonsense because they trust the media and agree with it. Republicans see this as an illegal “in-kind” contribution by the media to the Democrats and they no longer listen to or believe any mainstream media reports. And people wonder why we can’t agree on certain facts and why our country is so divided.

I’m grading this column as a “D” for biased reporting because even though I’m focused on just the one erroneous adjective, the whole tone is condescending and offensive. It uses words meant to demean Trump by characterizing his criticism of his employee as “ugly” and a “nasty personal attack” and “denigrating” Dr. Fauci.

So I guess the Democratic media machine not only wants people to “believe in science,” they also don’t want their scientists criticized. Very authoritarian of them, and not very professional or balanced.


Allen Nitschelm is publisher of He critiques the Boston Globe, mostly focusing on the bias in their news reporting. News articles are graded for bias, and the website has a listing of the average bias ratings for all reporters reviewed. See our website for more information and the four categories of articles we publish.

NOTE: We have been very active on our Facebook page for Public Editor Press. The page is getting lots of hits and comments, which have been very helpful. I urge readers to go there if you wish to participate or read reactions from others. You will need to “login” to Facebook to post your own comments but you can probably read them without a Facebook account. Here is the direct link to this article’s Facebook page:

To reach our Facebook site in general:


Author Rating

Rating: 2.0/10.


There are no user ratings at the moment.

Subscriber Ratings & Comments

Please be sure you are logged in to Rate Boston Globe Articles or Post Comments.

Here is the article you are rating for journalistic bias: President’s lawyers seek a ruling to halt tax record turnover

Rating scale in brief: 10 = A (No Bias) | 1 = F (Extreme Bias). For more details, please read Tips & Instructions below.

Please wait...

*Requires minimim of 5 Ratings to be displayed

Leave A Comment

Grading articles for bias is subjective. We hope that with widespread participation, we can give the reporters and editors at the Boston Globe valuable feedback on their professional work. Here are our suggestions for grading news articles for bias. (We do not rate editorial opinion columns for bias. But we do analyze the Boston Globe for overall editorial balance.)

Consider whether the article is completely free of bias (a grade of 10 or A), has been mostly free of bias (8 or 9, A- or B+), has been biased but not terribly or where the bias did not hurt the integrity of the underlying information (7 or 6, B or B-).

If the article was fairly biased overall, but subtle; or where the bias was particularly prominent but isolated to a single section, give the article a 5 or 4 (C+ or C). If the article was very biased but perhaps not intentionally so, perhaps a C- (3) would be deserved.

If the article was extremely prejudiced with major misstatements of fact, intentionally misleading, or ignored well known facts to advance a false narrative, give the article a D or F (2 or 1).

Reviewers must subscribe to Public Editor and agree to our terms of service to participate. Subscriptions are currently free. We recommend that all readers subscribe to the Boston Globe or the newspaper of their choice to support journalism, and to send the Boston Globe your feedback directly. Thank you for participating in Public Editor’s bias rating project!

Leave A Comment


Rating: 2.0/10.