In a surprise to exactly no one, the Boston Herald came out against Question 2 today. In fact, given the degree of blatant bias that’s underwritten every single story the Herald has published on the issue, you’d be forgiven for thinking that this paragon of journalistic integrity had already editorialized against Question 2.
The editors begin today’s 357-word campaign of misdirection by alleging that “[s]upporters of Question 2 get very prickly when anyone suggests their effort to decriminalize possession of a small amount of marijuana has anything to do with legalizing pot use.” The implication here is that the diligent reporters at the Herald have innocently asked simple questions – just doing their jobs – while we and others have been elusive on the issue.
Really, now? Let’s rewind.
On Wednesday, September 24, the Herald published a story cleverly titled, “Pro-Pot Backers Aim High." (Get it? “Aim high.” Good one, kids.) Now, bear in mind that this is a supposed “hard news” story, not an editorial, so one might reasonably expect at least a half-hearted attempt at impartiality. Nothing doing. Here’s the picture that accompanied the story on the front page:
When the Herald contacted campaign staff later the same day to get a quote for a follow-up story, we did the obvious thing – we refused to talk to them, citing the over-the-top bias in their stories. Instead, we provided a two-sentence statement calling them on their lack of integrity in reporting on the initiative. And our well-founded suspicions were quickly borne out: The “hard news” story that ran the following day simply reiterated the same claims, focusing on the red herring of “marijuana legalization” rather than on what Question 2 actually does. Second verse, same as the first.
Now, having apparently run out of “hard news” angles to slip their editorial bias into, the Herald formally editorialized against the initiative, drawing on the same false claims. It’s worth noting that this editorial comes after multiple earlier requests from the campaign to meet with the editorial board – a standard practice for reputable news outlets that was, unsurprisingly, ignored by the Herald. The pattern has been clear for some time now: The Herald is simply unwilling to let facts get in the way of their politics, to the detriment of all Massachusetts voters.
The fact is that Question 2 “legalizes” nothing, as anyone paying unbiased attention knows. Our campaign’s supporters come from diverse backgrounds and systems of belief. However, what any individual believes privately is utterly irrelevant to what an initiated law actually does. The text is available and its provisions are not murky. Question 2 is a modest reform measure that will appear on the ballot because over 100,000 Bay Staters signed their names to petitions to place it there.
The Herald’s naked attempts to misdirect and mislead voters are just base, unethical politicking in the guise of news reporting – the most familiar, crass kind of “yellow journalism.”
And they’ve done a disservice to voters throughout this process. Frankly, they ought to be ashamed of themselves. We won’t hold our breath.
