MEDIA FAIL: Watch Boston Media Admit Bias Against Tsarnaev

Reading Time: 2 minutes
WGBH panelists, decrying the need for “alleged” when it comes to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Credit: WGBH

WGBH panelists, decrying the need for “alleged” when it comes to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Credit: WGBH

Boston’s mainstream media has delivered its verdict on the allegations against marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev: he’s so guilty, there’s no need to used the word alleged anymore.

If there were any doubt that Boston’s media had a bias in the case, several of the city’s media pundits and one of its journalism professors have decisively put that question to rest. The panelists on WGBH’s “Beat the Press” were shameless in discarding any pretense of unbiased, neutral reporting.

The use of the word, “alleged” to identify a suspect who has not been convicted is a long-established practice of media ethics. It’s a standard which acknowledges that only properly-held trials can assign guilt. Yet using “alleged” or “accused” for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is unnecessary, according to the pundits on “Beat the Press.”

“In the case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, I wouldn’t have a big problem if somebody simply described him as ‘The Boston Bomber’ because, the evidence is overwhelming to the point (that) there is virtually no other side to this,” said Northeastern journalism Professor Dan Kennedy.

Alleged Impartiality

The Boston Globe’s Dante Ramos went one step further, arguing that the use of “alleged” or “allegedly” is just lip service in this case. The words are “the tribute that we pay to the idea of innocent until proven guilty. There’s no way of putting these facts together in a way that he’s not one of the perpetrators.”

But, given the high number of sealed motions, the dubious hospital bed confession, the restrictions placed on the defendant and his attorneys that have left him incommunicado, is Tsarnaev’s guilt a foregone conclusion?

The fact is that the public and the press don’t know the whole story–and still may not even after the trial. Tsarnaev’s attorneys have made a strong argument to move the trial from Boston. All along, they’ve argued that seating an impartial jury will be impossible in the city, primarily because many prospective jurors have been bombarded by press coverage that accepts the official narrative that Tsarnaev is guilty. A campaign of law enforcement leaks has only made it worse.

Yet, those leaks are only half the problem if the media willingly abdicates its responsibility to be fair-minded and impartial. The abdication of some of Boston’s press corps, it seems, has been total.

Where else do you see journalism of this quality and value?

Please help us do more. Make a tax-deductible contribution now.

Our Comment Policy

Keep it civilized, keep it relevant, keep it clear, keep it short. Please do not post links or promotional material. We reserve the right to edit and to delete comments where necessary.


18 responses to “MEDIA FAIL: Watch Boston Media Admit Bias Against Tsarnaev”

  1. onetree says:

    Yea, and if we wanted to be idiotic barbarians we could just go around killing people who we think might have done something wrong and we could just believe what liars tell us because it’s easier than doing the analysis ourselves.

    If there was one shred of credible evidence, I might doubt the innocence of the Tsarnaev brothers, but I have seen not a one. So I’m having a little trouble figuring out just exactly what “overwhelming” evidence these people are referring to. The day that it’s acceptable to kill or even imprison an innocent person without a shred of real evidence is the day that every single thinking person should give up any idea of patriotism or loyalty to such a system. All evidence, regardless of any “national security” concerns must be shared with the public as well as the defense and the jury. No evidence means there can be no confidence in the fairness of such a system. If they have evidence, then bring it forward so that it can be examined fully and honestly. If not, they should drop the case, admit the bombing was just another trick to further prop up the national security state (appropriately on Patriot’s Day), and then we can put the correct people in prison and get on with it.

  2. Brian Kirkland says:

    These people are failing to be journalist, that is, to report facts. The man is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. That’s a fact and it’s the bulwark of our system of laws.

  3. jane24 says:

    Acceptance of the omission of the word “alleged” prior to trial is, imo, much like the acceptance of martial law in Boston in that this is another step forward for the USG and their Orwellian agenda.

  4. Patriarch says:


  5. iquitfornow says:

    Hard to imagine………kids are paying 50 thousand a year for an education and taking classes from this guy…..whew

  6. Steve Sperdacion says:

    Russ Baker! You should mention on this site Bill Oreily getting caught lying about the JFK assassination! This would be a good time for you to try to get on MSM to talk about it, usually they don’t allow any JFK talk but this time they mentioned it by mistake because oreilly lying is a big stopry like Brian Williams lying.

  7. lofty1 says:

    What happened to the presumption of innocence in this country? The citizens of Boston should be ashamed of themselves for ignoring that common law.

  8. Seattle_Bill says:

    It’s not abdication; it’s outright corruption. There is so much that stinks about this hoax that the local media is being called upon to propagandize Tsarnaev’s guilt as loudly as possible in order to drown out any rumblings about the gaping holes in this case.

    • sfulmer says:

      The holes are not gaping, which is not to say the holes don’t exist. The public needs a trial and the defense needs access to whatever evidence the prosecution allegedly has.

    • sfulmer says:

      Oh, brother.

    • Patriarch says:

      “It’s okay though. You can go back to sleep now. I’m sure everything is going to work out just fine. Don’t be surprised though if you wake up one day soon to find the streets lined with armored personnel carriers and the skies filled with military helicopters. Because if you accept the implementation of martial law in Boston as a legitimate response to a patently fake ‘terrorist’ attack, then you have given your seal of approval for far more wide-reaching and far more permanent states of martial law in the not-so-distant future. And it will happen. The only question is when.”

    • sfulmer says:

      It wasn’t patently fake. Even false flag operations are real to the victims. We don’t know what happened, exactly, and there are plenty of questions that the media aren’t dealing with. I’ve already woken up to all the bullshit. I’ve also lived through real martial law, and this, by comparison, was not martial law. It was citizens cooperating and concerned. Overwhelming force was shown because it was there, available, and, yes, there is a movement to make us all into little Truman Show dolts. But real people were hurt. I know one, personally. Even though “Dave’sWeb” grandly admits that real people were hurt, the fake injury thing is not going to gain traction in the culture where real victims blood spilled. And the real scenario behind the bombing is not known, a fact that was even more to the point at the time for anyone struggling to understand why Boston might have thought it was ok to, you know, protect itself with police. I commend the fact that the police did not kill this kid, even though there may have been blood thirst to do so, so we can get him to tell the story. Turns out the law prevents that, anyway. In any event, let’s get this trial going. People with the “fake injury” narrative look like absolute idiots and are part of the reason why the media come out and talk like they know the case is a slam dunk. They know, like any one else with some degree of open minded inquiry, that the fake victim scenario is complete bullshit. The ridiculousness of it give them cover to spew their arrogance about the real evidence. Meanwhile, the role of FBI, CIA and whatever other organization, be they domestic or foreign, is not being investigated. So for those of us who are following WhoWhatWhy with real interest, please take the suggestion to shelve the “fake injury” scenario for a while and see whether or not anyone is going to listen to anything, first. Also, consider that if the planning for this event was as sophisticated as Davesweb is saying it was, then one of the most obvious facts to anyone seeing through it should be that it is not glaringly obvious, and there are no gaping holes in the prosecution’s story. That’s treachery. It’s actually an arguable case. That’s why we want a fair trial.

    • Mike G says:

      If it’s not already obvious (it is), a fair trial was never part of the plan. There ARE gaping holes, but most people will never hear about them because of the compliant media and the smearing of anyone who gets close to the truth. This does NOT mean I buy the fake injuries story……it has some interesting elements to it and there may be truth to some or all of it. I’m not at all surprised by the reactions of people living in Boston however, and I would guess if I had been there during that time, I’d have been glad the police were out in force. However, the only “evidence” that has been shown was from the authorities themselves and has not been corroborated outside of their ranks, as far as I’m aware. The brothers were classic patsies, following a well worn pattern used by US intelligence agencies. No, a fair trial will never happen in this case, no matter how much wishful thinking we engage in.

    • sfulmer says:

      Yes, I see what you mean, except it isn’t for nothing that close to 70% of the jury pool and, as this article points out, the media in general, have put pieces together in their minds and convinced themselves of the outcome. That’s why I’m even bothering to comment about GAPING. It isn’t as obvious as we, here, who think we know better, might like to believe. People aren’t stupid. And, again, consider what the patsy scenario is asking people to believe, if they don’t see it already. It is far from obvious!!!!!! People need to be walked through methods and conspiracy in a way that they may have absolutely no familiarity, let alone be in any way disposed to believe. The point of this article, as I see it, is Seattle_BIll’s comment about the outrage of the coverage aiding the misinformation. However, there is no evidence at all that there is any “calling on local media” to spread misinformation from anyone other than local media’s own internal calling. To suggest it is coming from somewhere is unfounded, unless you have a way of seeing it and believing it because of some prior knowledge of Mockingbird, for instance, or you actually have evidence. It simply is not obvious. Now, you could say that the FBI consultant to the media, John- can’t remember his last name right now – is playing a role by introducing the evidence of the boat writing into the media. That certainly looks like a planted story. And perhaps Northeastern Dan works for the CIA, wouldn’t surprise me. But the evidence, if there is any, is not obvious to anyone. CIA is hardly going to make it so, that’s for sure.

    • Seattle_Bill says:

      No, the holes are GAPING and most — if not all — of the injuries were fake. Please look at the pictures in Mr. McGowan’s photo-essay with your own two eyes. His series is based almost entirely on the photographic evidence. Look at the lack of shrapnel damage to signs and banners that should have been seen. Amputees are indeed paid to participate in disaster drills. The two FBI agents who captured Tsarnev died in a “training accident” off the coast of Virginia within two weeks. You, Sfulmer, are either gullible or a troll doing damage control.

    • sfulmer says:

      You have no idea!

    • KevinChamberlin says:

      While Dzokhar Tsarnaev was in the boat, he was not armed. The police and US Federal agents knew that he was not armed. Nevertheless, a number of bullets were fired at the boat while he was in the boat. Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Todashev were shot dead by the police and/or Federal agents. The goal of some of the police and/or and government agents was to shoot dead Dzokhar Tsarnaev. Oswald, a patsy, was murdered to cover up the facts and the true identities of those responsible for the JFK assassination. The Boston bombing may or may not be a false flag. The attempts of the agents of the state to murder those the state has alleged to have committed the bombing only reinforces the doubts of those who believe this to be a false flag.