The Globe neglected to point out that a political consultant might have a tendency to "spin" a meeting as something more than it really was. And there was no mention of the fact that nearly everyone has had a meeting experience where every participant left with a different opinion of what was said.

As to the fairness of the reporting, The Globe ran an Associated Press report on July 11, 2004, that opened with this sentence:

"NAACP chairman Julian Bond condemned Bush administration policies ... imploring members of the nation's oldest civil rights organization to increase voter turnout to oust the president from office."

The NAACP enjoys the same nonprofit, tax-exempt status as the Mormon Church. It has more than 500,000 members. Chairman Bond's comments were made in a heavily attended NAACP meeting and were widely distributed through the media.

So, if The Globe thought a politically oriented e-mail sent to 150 Mormons was a significant violation of tax-exempt status, how did The Globe react when the NAACP communicated its political agenda to millions? I think you know the answer. Let's just politely say that the response to the Mormon e-mail was disproportionate and unfair.

It's clear that The Globe only objects to political engagement by nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations when the political ideology engaged in is not acceptable to The Globe. The Globe has proven that sometimes journalistic standards mean nothing when political ideology is at stake.

---

Bruce Wilson is the author of "Disarming the Culture War: How the Silent Majority Can Break the Stalemate."