Pro-family activism that makes a difference!

MassResistance calls for pro-family 'interview boycott' of Boston Globe & Springfield Republican newspapers

How bad does it need to get?

POSTED: Jan 12, 2011

What the Boston Globe (and Springfield Republican) did to Scott Lively is in our opinion only the beginning. They are clearly out to demonize and attack us, and twist our words into propaganda against us. They may have a broad First Amendment right to do these things, but we don't have to help them. Thus, MassResistance is calling on the entire pro-family and conservative movement not to grant any interviews whatsoever with them or talk to their reporters.

This should not preclude individuals from communicating with them -- and sounding off to them. We still encourage people to write letters to the editor to the Globe, and even submit op-ed articles. You should especially feel free to contact individual reporters with feedback on their reporting.

Is this kind of news boycott counter-productive?

There's a mistaken belief in the pro-family movement that you need broad news coverage in the hostile mainstream media to be effective. That's not true, and never has been. A movement whose time has come does not need that kind of help. Three examples over the last 50 years: (1) The Civil Rights movement in the 1960s, (2) the fall of the Soviet Union's empire in the 1980s, and (3) the Tea Party movement over the past year. These all got either negative coverage or none at all in the local mainstream media.

Moreover, now with the proliferation of cable and Internet, a single local newspaper or TV station media is not the overwhelming venue for information.

Other current news boycotts

A few years ago MassResistance and other pro-family groups stopped granting any interviews with the homosexual newspaper Bay Windows. The extreme anti-family and particularly anti-Catholic behavior of that "newspaper" as well as its promotion of perversions is well-known. Except for certain Republican leaders (such as Jennifer Nassour) that boycott has held up. This one needs to, also.

We also don't talk to the local Boston Fox TV News because of their profound bias in these issues. Here's an example of what we're talking about. For some reason the local Fox news outlets in many cities (including Boston and Chicago) are aggressively pro-homosexual, much more so than the "liberal" TV stations, surprisingly.

When a purported news organization appears dedidated to villifying and defaming you and your positions, the short-term publicity gained from cooperating with them is never worth it.