Game of Gotcha, part one

Game of Gotcha, part one

PE Bias Grade : F

By: Allen Nitschelm on August 18, 2020 | Article Review

This is a review of the following Boston Globe Article:
Article Title President ignores reporter’s repeated blunt questions about lying
Date 08/15/2020
Article Link Boston Globe ( Page A3 )
Syndicated From Washington Post
Journalist Tim Elfrink
Article Summary

Press highlights rudeness of reporter as a virtue at White House press briefing.

Share This Story

On Thursday, President Trump held one of his now-daily press conferences to talk about Coronavirus and the political news of the day. As usual, Trump took several questions from the media. I will be writing about two Boston Globe articles based on that day’s press conference. You can watch the press conference here:

In general, Trump has pretty good instincts when it comes to publicity. He basically carries the news cycle several times a week by injecting himself into whatever is happening. Sometimes, however, he simply can’t resist taking the bait, and the media (at the White House Press corps) knows this and uses it. So I want to give two examples of the media’s “gotcha” game. Today’s example is the incredibly rude question that a reporter asked President Trump and how the media handled it when he rightfully ignored it. The question comes up at 1:10:55 on the video link.

And the second example is how the media promoted a “conspiracy theory” and then claimed that Trump was promoting it. This second example in the 8/17 Boston Globe is a follow-up article, just to show that the media will not let a good “conspiracy theory” attack on President Trump go away. This happens at 1:12:20 on the video link.

Both of these examples came with President Trump being open and accessible to the media, and taking questions from hostile reporters, something that his political opponent doesn’t seem to want to do. But unlike the treatment Trump receives from most of the media, Joe Biden has little to worry about because the media is clearly on his side.

Republicans are used to this because it has been that way since Barry Goldwater. Every Republican politician that comes along is vilified, until they die or leave office, and then they were fantastic and why can’t the current crop of Republicans be more like they were?

What is funny is how Mitt Romney, who was viciously attacked by the press when he ran for President, is now doing their bidding by being the most visible opponent of President Trump. Does Mitt know he is a tool of the Left?

I understand that many Republicans are opposed to certain policies that Trump promotes, and there is no question that Trump’s incessant tweeting and incendiary remarks can often be upsetting and offensive. But this is how Trump operates and we have to take the bad with the good. And Trump’s positives far outweigh his negatives.

So at the Thursday press conference, an incredibly rude reporter asks Trump if he regrets lying so much. Trump ignored the question as he should have. That should have ended it, but the media (through today’s example, written by the Washington Post and published in the Boston Globe) wanted to highlight the question and Trump’s refusal to respond and so they publish an article about it.

If you watch the press conference, Trump is asked this question but he clearly can’t hear it, so he asks the reporter to repeat it. The reporter does and Trump moves on to the next question. This turns into a description that starts out with a lie by the media: “President ignores reporter’s repeated blunt questions about lying.” You know this is a false story when they exaggerate the situation right off the bat.

The article then goes on to extol the virtue of this biased “reporter,” who is clearly an opinion journalist and not a news journalist. And he wasn’t there to ask President Trump a question, he was there to score political points for the Left. And then the media covers it like it is something newsworthy.

Based on my research for this website, I’d say “the media” falsely reports on President Trump 10x more than any so-called lies that Trump tells. (Every time I investigate one of these alleged lies, I find out the media is lying, exaggerating, playing stupid, can’t tell it’s a joke, etc.)

This is truly pathetic “reporting” and the reporter who asked the question should be seen and not heard at future press conferences.

To read Part Two, click here:


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: 1.0/10.


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 ignores reporter’s repeated blunt questions about lying

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: 1.0/10.