Sam Adams was not an objective journalist he was a blogger. Although he created the “Journal of occurrences,” he was a controversial, radical, and biased person. Anyone that read his journals could see how much he hated the British. A journalist is supposed to communicate the truth with the public, a quality Adams did not possess. The “Journal of Occurrences” was biased and very exaggerated when speaking about the British and the crimes they committed against the commonpeople. Adams’s journal entries was not deliverd in a journalistic point of view but rather his anger towards the British for stationing their troops in Boston due to tax inauguration. He created juicy stories for people who were bored of reading regular news and the temperature weather. Some of these stories included tales of the soldiers and their drunken behavior, foul language, outrageous behaviors and low morals. However, the frequent subject that Adams emphasized frequently were soldiers mistreating the American citizens through violence and rape. Evidence later on demonstrated that Adams’s journal entries were false as it came to be known his dates did not
match real life events.
Similar to nowadays blogs, the journals listed an entry per day describing events that would happen on each of those dates. At the end of it all, Adams’s entries were fake but written simply to give the British a worse reputation. His journal entries were not objective as he was creating a different image of the British but still having an impact on politics. His tales were causing the American colonists to revolt against the British colonists; that in August 1769 officials withdrew the Brisitsh militamen from Boston. Overall, Adams had somewhat an influence on the Journalism Codes of ethics when they were being created however,
since he developed the first form of gathering news while giving the public access to it. He is a perfect example of what not to do and how misleading journalism can become if no boundaries are set.