I remember the last time we had very destructive wildfires in California, President Trump opined that poor forest management was to blame. His comments were scoffed at by California Liberals.
Now it is happening again, even worse, and it has become apparent that Trump was right. Even California Gov. Newsom admitted as much (and blamed climate change too, of course.) Too bad they didn’t listen to Trump and take action last time. Well, maybe next time.
Today’s article complains that Trump isn’t talking enough about the recent fires. Yet the press questions him, often multiple times a day, so perhaps the fault lies with the White House press corps which is more obsessed with politics and Trump Derangement Syndrome than national disasters. If the journalists at the Washington Post are so concerned with the President’s words about wildfires, maybe they need to lay off the Russia collusion story for a few days?
Like a Seinfeld episode, this is a filler article that is really about nothing. But at the end of this really stupid article is the advice on how the journalist wants readers to think. “One way to think about this…” is the friendly reporter’s advice in the last paragraph.
Usually this advice is hidden, part of the media’s subliminal messaging that Trump is evil and you need to vote for Democrats if you aren’t deplorable or racist.
But now, the media says, think of it this way: everything Trump does is to further his re-election. Period. He has no set of core values and isn’t fulfilling campaign promises. He has no motivations except his personal benefit.
If you’ve ever watched a Trump rally, he goes through his list of accomplishments and promises kept. It is quite long and impressive, even more so given the constant turmoil in his administration and the constant fighting of his policies by the Democrats and the media. It is a wonder that he has stuck to his agenda.
That President Trump does not want the country to turn to Socialism is a big reason to vote to re-elect him. It is perhaps the biggest reason. That could be why the media is claiming that re-election is all he cares about, making it about his narcissism instead of what is best for the country.
President Trump left a very good life as a successful businessman to enter politics. He did so partly because of patriotism and partly because he has a large ego and thought he would do a great job. His ego is intact and he has done a great job.
But the Boston Globe and Washington Post want you to think this is just an ego trip and has nothing to do with what is best for the country, and they conveniently say so in plain sight (see photo three).
I think the media is starting to get nervous when we see so much Trump success and Joe Biden is still hiding in his basement, answering questions with help of a teleprompter.
Allen Nitschelm is publisher of PublicEditorMA.com. 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: https://www.facebook.com/390560688135747/posts/929670490891428/
To reach our Facebook site in general: https://www.facebook.com/publiceditorpress/
*Requires minimim of 5 Ratings to be displayed
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!