Where’s Hunter, Boston Globe?
On Wednesday, October 14, the New York Post published a bombshell report about Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, who allegedly arranged a meeting between his father, the Vice President at the time, and a top Burisma executive. Biden had previously denied having anything to do with Hunter’s work for Burisma, a Ukrainian energy firm, when he was in charge of US-Ukrainian relations during the Obama administration. He has since repeatedly said there is no evidence of any wrongdoing. Until now.
The report was written based on new emails allegedly obtained from a laptop computer that Hunter Biden dropped off for repair in Delaware but never picked up. The laptop allegedly included incriminating videos of Hunter using drugs and having sex, and it contained thousands of emails and other electronic communications.
I looked for the Boston Globe’s version of the story on Thursday, but nothing was published.
The story took on even more meaning when Facebook and Twitter appeared to censor it’s users from linking to the NY Post story, and Twitter reportedly locked out the Post’s Twitter account. This also is newsworthy, for a different reason, censorship. These newsworthy developments were also not reported by the Globe on Thursday.
The Globe routinely publishes newspaper reports from other outlets that rely on information that the newspaper receives through unknown means or anonymous sources. A recent story in the New York Times allegedly reported on the contents of President Trump’s confidential tax returns, whose release is illegal. However, the Times is protected under the First Amendment, so the legal liability likely rests with their secret source, whom the Times refused to divulge.
The New York Times ran its bombshell story about President Trump’s tax returns on 9/27. Here is a link to that reporting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/27/us/donald-trump-taxes.html
The next day, the Boston Globe put the story on its front page. See my photo three.
The Times reporting, however, is based on clearly illegally obtained information, a private tax return. In addition, the Times gave no supporting information for readers to weigh the truth behind their reporting, which they said was to protect their source. So readers must “completely trust” the NY Times in its reporting, and the Globe obviously does, but the NY Post’s reporting with much better sourcing is ignored. How convenient.
Yet the NY Post’s reporting seems more believable to any outside observer (like the Boston Globe, or even the general public). The laptop information was obtained by the computer-repair company which was legally authorized to look at the files. Evidently they caused concern because the store owner gave the computer to the FBI (while retaining a copy). This chain of command is both believable and apparently legal, and it affirms the authenticity of the underlying documents found in the computer, even if the source should not have divulged them. The source would face any legal risk or repercussions, not the media that published them. That’s what the Pentagon papers-case ruled years ago. So the Boston Globe faced no legal liability in reporting on what the NY Post wrote.
The NY Post published its first story on October 14 (https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/). The Associated Press published a story on the Post reporting on the Bidens covering both angles (the emails and the social-media censorship) on Thursday, October 15th. This shows the Globe had time to do the same in its Thursday edition.
So it appears the Post was within its First Amendment rights time publish their expose, and the Boston Globe chose to ignore the story entirely. The only purpose of doing so would be to prevent damage to the Democratic nominee, Joe Biden, whom the Globe has endorsed.
No one can now dispute that the Boston Globe is using its news pages to help Joe Biden, a clear violation of its journalistic integrity.
I have included a fourth photo, taken from the Boston Globe on October 17, which assumes the NY Times facts as reported a month earlier, and reports on the Trump “town hall” event on NBC in which the “moderator” repeatedly questioned President Trump about his taxes. Yet the ABC “town hall” event didn’t ask Joe Biden once about the NY Post story, nor did it assume that the Post’s reporting was truthful. This is another example of extreme media bias by the broadcast networks, but also how the Boston Globe uses this reporting to build up the anti-Trump narrative, yet does not even mention the obvious corruption in the Biden family.
(The Boston Globe did cover the controversy over Facebook and Twitter censoring the NY Post on Friday, a day late and a dollar short. There was little mention of the underlying Post reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop and the details it contained. A link to the Friday Boston Globe story is here: https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?artguid=8588423b-3ea8-4d93-a565-f7be38e7e2ff&appid=1165).
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/957694324755711
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!