I recently posted a review of a Globe article that supported newly elected Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) attacking Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. Clark charged DeVos with racism, a charge the Boston Globe now uses haphazardly. Anyone and everyone on the Right is either a racist or a racist-in-waiting. Wait until any Republican mentions race, and then label them a racist. Only Democrats are free of racism (at least, outside of Virginia.)
DeVos cited a study that said that disciplining students was not necessarily racist just because more minorities were disciplined. The study looked at previous discipline and found that when you controlled for previous behavior, minorities were not disproportionally disciplined.
This has become an issue because the Obama administration used the logically flawed argument that “disparate outcomes” based on race must mean that the underlying actions are racist, otherwise you wouldn’t have any measurable racial difference.
The theory that something is “racist” because a policy happens to affect races differently is in error because it doesn’t prove cause and effect. It is fine to further study these “disparate outcomes,” but we can’t and shouldn’t conclude “racism” because not every outcome is caused by racism. If we find actual racism (and not just infer its existence), then obviously take action to correct it. But disparate outcomes does not prove underlying racism and DeVos is right to rescind these rules.
Walker throws around racism today like he’s been taking lessons from Renee Graham, who is a racist. Maybe Walker has joined her team. But these constant articles on the Op/Ed pages, using terms like “white nationalist,” has become a barrage. It’s almost like the Globe has a quota for making sure Trump or his advisers are tarred with this brush on at least a weekly basis. We are now seeing tons of commentary regarding Stephen Miller, who a Democrat Congresswoman labeled a white supremacist. Once that happens, I think the media feels unconstrained to repeat and amplify those comments.
Walker uses a familiar trick in liberally quoting Clark, who makes the charges directly. He says Clark called “the entire Trump administration … racist.” That is some quote.
I would also point out that the people who must be actually performing racism systematically (if you believe this theory) are teachers. Teachers are almost always members of the teacher’s union and are largely Liberals. Are teachers racist? Because they are the individuals who are being charged with racism, perhaps not individually but collectively, by Rep. Clark and Walker. That is the bottom line of their complaint. Why isn’t the national teacher’s union complaining about these slurs about their members?
How about we allow teachers to maintain order and discipline in their classroom so they can teach? Isn’t that how we advance learning for all students?
Let’s end with a quote from Walker, who would prefer teachers not control their classrooms when students are unruly because that would “seriously [derail students’] learning.” That’s the type of conclusion when political correctness determines policies. And that’s exactly why DeVos is overturning the Obama policy.
*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!