What does the Boston Massacre demonstrate about the perception and bias concerning an historical event?

When I hear the word "massacre," I think of many people
being killed in an incident that is unprovoked and
unjustifiable.  This is not the way it was at the Boston Massacre, yet we use
that name for it.  This is an example of perception and bias with regard to a historical
event.

The massacre was not unprovoked.  There was a lot of
animosty between soldiers and Bostonians.  Just before the massacre, people were
throwing things (including rocks) at the British guards.  The guards may well have
feared for their lives.  The massacre itself killed five people, which is a lot, but
which does not reach the level of " href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/massacre">massacre" by
definition.

Perception and bias comes in because the
British were the "bad guys" in our eyes.  Because of that, we see their actions as
uniformly bad and the actions of the Patriots (including the Tea Party and the violence
against government officials) as good.  We are biased in favor of our side and that
strongly affects the way we look at historical events.