In my previous On Tap post, I took a potshot at The Boston Globe for endorsing Jake Auchincloss, the most conservative Democrat running in one of America’s most liberal House seats, the district once held by Barney Frank and now being given up by Joe Kennedy as he challenges Sen. Ed Markey. Both contests will be decided in the September 1 Democratic primary.

Potshots are seldom a great idea, even in blog posts. In this one, I repeated the published story that the endorsement was prompted by the family connections between Auchincloss, 32, a registered Republican as recently as 2014, and John and Linda Henry, owners of the Globe and the Boston Red Sox. Linda Henry regularly sits in on Globe editorial meetings.

I received an aggrieved email from the Globe’s editorial page editor, Bina Venkataraman, who insists that the endorsement was solely the work of the Globe editorial board, with no interference from either of the Henrys. She wrote, "I can assure you I knew nothing nor was told nothing about the Henrys wishes about the endorsement, and I truly believe they had no preference. I knew nothing about their connections, which seem rather weak if you actually look at the facts. The endorsement deliberation at the time it occurred led to the majority of the board converging on Auchincloss."

Venkataraman also says that the connection between the Henrys and Jake Auchincloss’s mother, Laurie Glimcher, is exaggerated. Glimcher is the CEO of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, beneficiary of the Jimmy Fund, the Red Sox’s leading charitable cause since 1948. Linda Henry has said that she has only a casual acquaintance with Glimcher.

I take Venkataraman at her word that nobody told her whom to endorse. I should have done my own reporting before venturing into this story based on secondhand information. I have no way of knowing whether hints might have been dropped to other members of the editorial board. Venkataraman says she is not aware of any; and again I take her at her word.

That said, the endorsement produced great controversy at the Globe. Venkataraman felt the need to do a Zoom event with Auchincloss to help explain and justify the endorsement. Space was given to a Globe columnist, Shirley Leung, to write a scathing dissent from the Auchincloss endorsement. And to me, anyway, it is far more persuasive than the Globe’s official editorial of endorsement.

Given the way the world works, it is just not believable that Glimcher, whose family is bankrolling her son’s campaign, would not want to promote his candidacy. Nor, given the close connection between the Globe and the Jimmy Fund, do I believe that Glimcher has only the most casual acquaintance with the Henrys. At the level of elites, Boston is a very small town. And it doesn’t get much cozier than the Sox and Dana-Farber.

At other great papers, notably The New York Times and The Washington Post, the wife of the owner does not sit in on editorial meetings and look over the shoulders of the editors. When such things occur, explicit directives are not required.

I believe Venkataraman when she says that nobody told her, explicitly or implicitly, whom to endorse. With Linda Henry sitting in on her meetings, I sure don’t envy her tightrope act.