Boston Mayor Michelle Wu doubled down on her “Electeds of Color” holiday party, drawing critical media perspectives across the spectrum.

End The Tradition: An opinion for The Boston Globe (Left bias) criticized Wu for defending the event as a tradition and called it a bad look for a politician who expressed she could unite “a city that is too often at odds over race.” The writer compared Wu’s party to a tradition in the 70s when most political reporters in Boston were male and held a yearly party that excluded the few female reporters, adding that whether it affects the marginalized or powerful, “exclusion is exclusion.”

No Context Needed: An opinion for The Messenger (Center bias) stated, “Segregation in any form… is wrong. No ambiguity; no context needed.” The writer argued that a whites-only party would draw widespread media demands for resignation and included context on other segregated events in the public eye, like blacks-only graduation ceremonies from UC-Berkeley and Harvard, the latter of which Wu is an alumnus.

“Separate But Equal”: An opinion for The New York Post (Right bias) said Wu’s segregated party calls attention to the current state of progressivism, “which these days means embracing some deeply regressive views,” and goes against the core principles of the Civil Rights Act. It likened progressives’ recent segregated events to the “separate but equal crowd” of the past and said while Americans have a right to do what they want in private, separating people based on skin color is “beyond toxic” and “unconstitutional.”