Unmasking hypocrisy

Unmasking hypocrisy

PE Bias Grade : D

By: Allen Nitschelm on March 14, 2020 | Article Review

This is a review of the following Boston Globe Article:
Article Title Security contractor recruits ex-spies to help infiltrate liberal groups
Date 03/08/2020
Article Link Boston Globe ( Page A13 )
Syndicated From New York Times
Journalist Adam Goldman
Mark Mazzetti
Article Summary

Article details contacts between Trump administration and conservative website which conducts investigative reporting of Liberals groups and Democrats.

Share This Story

Project Veritas is a conservative website which does investigative journalism. It is backed by conservatives and Trump supporters, so it naturally targets Liberal organizations like Planned Parenthood, the Democratic Party, labor union groups, etc.

Their most effective investigations have included undercover operatives who interview people in these organizations and get them to admit their hypocrisy. Often, the conclusions are something like “do as we say, not as we do.”

This Boston Globe article, syndicated from the New York Times, tries to confuse readers about this organization, making it sound like what they are doing is wrong or illegal. It is as wrong and illegal as investigative reporting done by the New York Times and the Boston Globe. This article is another example of Liberal hypocrisy. Only Liberals can investigate Conservatives, not the other way around.

That the people at Project Veritas get trained by professionals is not at all surprising. I don’t think getting past the various gatekeepers in order to go undercover is something that most people are naturally good at. It probably takes training and practice.

There have been many changes to journalism, most of them very bad. First, the economic model that supported good journalism has disappeared. Most newspapers (where most journalists at least used to be employed) have not found a way yet to effectively compete with the Internet, so newspapers are paring staff and closing down. And as I have documented on this page, our major media newspapers have become affiliates of the Democrat Party, trying to directly participate in the removal of the elected President. Once that attempted failed–twice–they are now trying to hurt President Trump by any means possible to convince voters that we should turn to Socialism to solve our problems. And we can do that with an absentee President who is starting to suffer from cognitive issues even before being elected. What happens if Joe Biden becomes President and his mental state continues to deteriorate? Will Democrats who are pretending he is fine be forced to keep up that pretense? Instead of the Emperor having no clothes, he is going to have no mind.

But one good change to journalism is there is now an essentially free way to distribute your news to the vast majority of Americans. All you need is an Internet connection and some followers. And then social media can spread your message to millions.

Project Veritas is a good example of a new type of journalism that can operate in the “free media” market, and its reporting, while inherently biased, is valuable, the attempts to smear their name and reputation notwithstanding.

This article tries to tie the Trump administration to a consultant hired by Project Veritas. I’d like the Boston Globe to disclose all of the contacts it has had with the Elizabeth Warren campaign, how the paper and the campaign colluded to report her DNA results and “exonerated” her by claiming she received no benefit to her Native American ancestry claims, and how these types of interactions with a prospective Presidential nominee are not at a lower level than any Trump administration affiliates had with Project Veritas or one of their consultants.

——=——

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/801189527072859

To reach our Facebook site in general: https://www.facebook.com/publiceditorpress/

 

Author Rating

Rating: 2.0/10.

Description

Reader Ratings:

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: Security contractor recruits ex-spies to help infiltrate liberal groups

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

Subject

Rating: 2.0/10.

Description