The Boston Globe continues to falsely report President Trump’s Charlottesville remarks. This is a false narrative that after repeated use can now be called a hoax. It has been repeated so much by the media and their talking heads that people accept it as truth. Yet if you watch a five-minute video in which Trump makes his remarks, you can see the whole thing is a total fabrication. Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs
Just to recap, there was a rally planned in Charlottesville by people who were against removing historical statues. I think Robert E. Lee was depicted in one of them. Anyway, the rally attracted all sorts of other people, including some individuals or groups associated with white supremacy. They may have had other reasons for wanting to keep the Lee statue on display. But the original rally was about preserving history, and to those people (and those who wanted to remove the statues), President Trump said there were fine people on both sides. He specifically excluded the “white supremacists” from those supportive remarks.
I have done several articles on this hoax and I would refer you to the one in which candidate Joe Biden announces his candidacy and uses this false narrative as a pretext for running. If you wonder how the media’s biases can be used for bad purposes, here is a great example. Their false reporting has led a top presidential candidate to run for office based on Trump being a “racist.” Here is the link, which includes the transcript of Trump’s words: https://ma.publiceditorpress.com/boston-globe-prints-extremely-biased-summary/
So after all this reporting, the media still refuses to correctly report this information, instead preferring to charge President Trump with being a racist. This vile accusation is based on this hoax report. That it continues is outrageous.
Today’s reference is a bit unusual. It quotes a “former aide to Senator Marco Rubio” who uses the Charlottesville reference, which the journalist then writes “referring to the president’s remark that there were ‘very fine people on both sides’ of a deadly white supremacist march in Virginia in 2017.”
It is also unusual that the character assassination of President Trump using this false hoax is contained within the character assassination story of Stephen Miller. The Globe first attacked Miller a week or two ago, and we wrote about that as well. This article is a follow-up, and since Miller has been called a white supremacist, might as well get Trump in on it too. Two birds of a feather, I guess. Here is our commentary on the first Miller article: https://ma.publiceditorpress.com/next-character-to-assassinate/
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/724296861428793
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!