Editor’s note from Sunday’s Boston Globe:
A May 24 story about a protest against an Israeli ambassador’s commencement speech at Brandeis University was written by a part-time correspondent who failed to disclose that he had previously editorialized in personal Internet posts against Israeli policy toward Palestinians. Globe editors learned of those posts while conducting an internal review of the Brandeis coverage. The correspondent’s failure to disclose a conflict violated Globe policy, and he should not have been assigned to cover the event. The story failed to include coverage of the substance of the remarks made by Michael Oren, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, and made no mention of an electronic petition supporting his appearance.
Here’s the hardworking staff’s post about the piece last month.
And here’s the New Republic’s Marty Peretz back then about the Globe’s persistent anti-Israel bias.
So, nu?
Nothing yet from Peretz on the Globe Editor’s note.
But inquiring minds want to know.
Campaign Outsider 
Pingback: Media Nation » Globe acknowledges bias in Brandeis report
Good posting, John. Sloppy and insensitive assignment decision by Globe shows papers can never assign available reporter solely because he/she shows breath on the mirror. This kind of personal agenda, not discovered until after the coverage, is all too common.
I noticed that once this story reached TV on Beat the Press, there was no mention of Martin Peretz whatsoever. However, on the Beat the Press blog, they credit you with being the source of the story.
Do you think the Beat the Press piece accurately reflects your story? Or was your take on it inaccurate? I’ve been going back and forth with Dan Kennedy on this and other aspects of this story and here’s how he put it today.
“Peretz is a red herring. I picked up on the story because of John Carroll’s blog, and John, in turn, linked to Peretz. But the reality is that this was a dispute that played out between Brandeis and the Globe.”
Not sure where your conversation with Dan is occurring, Bob, and not sure where I fit in, either. Peretz made a charge against the Globe that turned out to be factual – the news report was slanted and inaccurate.
Who actually spurred the Globe editors to examine the reporter’s background further – Brandeis or Peretz – I don’t know.
I just know Peretz is the one who initially brought it to my attention.
Sorry, I should have been more specific. I’ve been commenting on Dan Kennedy’s Media Nation blog, specifically on his post of June 14. “Globe acknowledges bias . . . .”
You don’t know how you fit it? Really?
Thanks, Bob. Just checked the comments thread on Media Nation and now know how I fit in – a straw in the wind.
Last word on this, a few years later: Michael Corcoran should never have been assigned to cover an event he was not capable of objectively reporting on (honestly, he shouldn’t have been assigned to any project that involved doing research or having any ability to write well, but that’s in relation to his extreme lack of talent, not his bias set) and Bob wanted to focus on a false angle because the real one clearly annoyed him. If Bob takes up his online pen in support of anyone else, I hope for the sake of American comedy he doesn’t do so with idiotic examples in support of a loser.
That’s what I call a slow burn.
With you there, Bob.