Thanks to hlpeary there is no excuse for BMGers to have missed this Huffington Post story chronicling the unholy relationship between the Boston Globe and Boston’s US Attorneys Office.
On Friday and Saturday the Globe and Herald attacked the mayor and circled the wagons to protect Carmen Ortiz. Not only were they deflecting the story they were sending a message to our little high school that they are still the cool kids/bullies no matter what the kids from a bigger and cooler school say. They still rule. This story is a one time thing.
Wrong.
Those bigger, cooler, and cockier kids from the Huffington Post are still here. Yesterday they killed the Globe and Herald for the ridiculous grade school response that could only be sold to a brain washed community brought up on a big lie. (that’s us)
Here’s some of HuffPosts observations.
As if working to prove the point, Boston media promptly turned its guns on the mayor and HuffPost in response.
The reaction is symptomatic of the problem HuffPost laid out.
The Boston press has lost its mind.
It’s been interesting to watch the Herald ride to the defense of Ortiz, when the HuffPost article’s criticism of the media focused on its rival, the Globe.
Watch as our local-big-feeling-self-important-living-a-lie-“journalists”-bullies-but-wussies at the Globe, Herald and WGBH get deservedly slammed.
Mayor Walsh would win it. I think he can defend himself from Carmen Ortiz. You linked to the wrong video, Ernie, and the wrong bully.
> “The Globe/Ortiz connection does a disservice to all the people,” [Matt Connolly] said.
> “Never has the newspaper issued a critical word about her office. The
> rest of our local media is also silent.”
Ortiz was supported by the Globe slightly more than half of the times. The Globe was, in particular, critical of the Swartz treatment. And of most of the investigations tied to the Tsarnaevs.
The HuffPost is not even careful to get its facts straight. – It’s a naked political attack, disguised as news reporting. One of the authors is even bylined as ‘reporter’. Reporter of what – of his own personal opinion?
Yvonne Abraham, of the Globe metro page, has an op/ed supportive of Walsh & critical of Ortiz:
“It is perfectly legal for City Hall officials to imply, as they do all the time, that a person with business before them will have an easier time if they do this or that — say, hire union workers, use a favored contractor, retain a particular attorney. But framing that suggestion as an explicit requirement is illegal, even if the person who does it has nothing to gain personally. If prosecutors are right, these guys made the mistake of spelling out the deal. “
To which one of the readers responded the following:
“It warms the heart to see Yvonne’s support of an Old Boston tradition, the discrete shakedown. A mention that a particular law firm will help a lot with an application, pointing out that inspectional services really likes one of the plumbing contractors in the city, suggesting that a few extra union voters on the job site payroll is never a bad thing, etc. Nothing indictable of course, just a bit of grease for the wheels.
That’s how to really encourage new innovative companies to relocate to Boston, honoring the good old ways.”
This little exchange has all you need to know about the issue at hand.
battle just by playing.