Topic ID 2022
I don't know if anyone else thinks the same, but I in my personal opinion, the content of the lead story of the Mercury was a one sided sycophantic piece of journalism. I felt they had lost sight of the alleged serious sexual offence that had taken place and chose to gain quotes and support for the alleged perpetrator of the said act. To me, this shows lack of respect for the victim and showed positive bias toward the accused. Does anyone have any comments on this?
Reply ID 26594
Agreed, azzza. I thought it was poor taste to have a bloody great photo of someone famous to sell the paper. They obviously haven't been told more information by the police and/or the courts and were obviously missing a lead story so decided to run with it anyway.
Reply ID 26597
I agree - not enough content to make much of a story though there's usually no smoke without fire. Let's hope that the alleged victim receives the support they require and that the alleged perpertrator is dealt with fairly and justly. Generally I think the Mercury is a great local newspaper but just now and again they headline with a 'nothing' story - remember the 7/7 story which just happened to focus on the husband of a Lib Dem Ware Town Councillor who had fortunately missed the terrible events of that morning?
Reply ID 26598
I would have thought as well that plastering the name and photo of the accused lad all over the paper in the name of 'journalism' might prejudice any case against him?
Reply ID 26601
quote:I have to agree, surely these sort of stories should not be published til after the case has been resolved.
Originally posted by Leo Densian
I would have thought as well that plastering the name and photo of the accused lad all over the paper in the name of 'journalism' might prejudice any case against him?
Reply ID 26609
quote:Isn't the photo of Rupert Grint not the accused person!!!?
Originally posted by Leo Densian
I would have thought as well that plastering the name and photo of the accused lad all over the paper in the name of 'journalism' might prejudice any case against him?
Reply ID 26611
Rupert Grint was not the accused. He just knew the boy who as far as I am aware has not been proven to be anything yet. I wonder how others on this forum would appreciate it if any one of their acquaintances was accused of something and they ended up with THEIR photo plastered all over the front page of the local rag (its not a proper newspaper!) Boycott the paper!
Reply ID 26612
Ladywood - your comment 'no smoke without fire' shows just the reason the Mercury should leave this story alone. Remind me never to be accused of anything when you are on the jury.
Reply ID 26613
It's a horrible piece of journalism of the type we have come to expect from Raymond Brown. Hacks at the national red-tops get well paid for writing garbage that ruins people's lives so maybe their lack of decency is motivated by personal greed. But Mercury journalists are paid a pittance. Why do they do it? It must sell papers. So those of us who buy the Mercury have only ourselves to blame. [V]
Reply ID 26624
spooky - you have taken four of my words out of context. If you read the rest of my posting properly you should have understood that I am advocating fairness and support all round. It appears to be a 'nothing' story and is a waste of space. Incidentally the Herald also carried this story (inside). You will be delighted to know that I spend enough of my professional life attending Court and have no wish to get called for jury service.
Reply ID 26633
I have always believed that the anonymity of the alleged perpetrator should be maintained along with anonymity of the alleged victim until the alleged offence is proved. Whilst not wishing to diminish the seriousness of the alleged offence, it may be worth considering that this could be a case of wolf-crying because of the host's celebrity connection. If it becomes the case that this offence is proved, then by all means scream the perpetrator's name from the roof-tops and publish his photo in the local rag as a warning to others. Conversely, if this turns out to be a false allegation, the accuser's name should ALSO be screamed from the roof-tops, and likewise her photo should be published in the local rag as a warning too.
Reply ID 34557
The 18-year-old accused in connection with this alleged attack, a former pupil at Richard Hale, appeared at St Albans Crown Court yesterday. Today's 'Sun' newspaper names him and carries a photo and short article. Back in September, the Mercury ran the article refered to in this thread, emphasising what a nice young man the accused is. They interviewed his mum and ran quotes from her about her quiet, well-behaved son. The distress caused to the child who is the alleged victim and her family by that shockingly prejudicial and shameful journalism, can only be imagined. [V]
Reply ID 34597
If the Mercury content is prejudicial Rachel, then it is likely that your repetition of the content in this forum would also be so, despite your comments. It doesn't matter if you are quoting another source - it could still be prejudicial! In fact it could deemed worse given the timing of your comments in relation to the trial. So careful now!
Reply ID 34840
Welcome to the forum, xtra_xtra. [:)] I look forward to reading your comments on other community issues now you've joined the forum. [;)] I note the Mercury had some coverage of this case in Friday's edition, naming and printing a photo of the teenager accused in connection with the alleged crime and, like the Sun, using 'Potter' in the headline and running a picture of the famous local actor from the Harry Potter films.
Reply ID 34885
Thanks for the welcome. I've been an observer for some time on the lively debate about our town and thought it was time to make the plunge. Re: the Mercury's article. Surely the press is free to name people involved in court cases without it being prejudicial? The accused appeared in court, I believe you can print what is said in open court. Does the Harry Potter link make it prejudicial? I don't think it does (but it's not up to me to decide that). I think it is an interesting fact about the case though - indeed it provoked you into commenting - which shows that even you are interested in it, despite your criticism. And it is understandable for newspapers to promote the most interesting aspect of a story, just as you would, if you were telling it to someone. So I don't understand your gripe.
Reply ID 34895
quote:The gripe is the extremely poor level of journalism. Commenting on something doesn't mean it's automatically interesting.
Originally posted by xtra_xtra Does the Harry Potter link make it prejudicial? I don't think it does (but it's not up to me to decide that). I think it is an interesting fact about the case though - indeed it provoked you into commenting - which shows that even you are interested in it, despite your criticism. And it is understandable for newspapers to promote the most interesting aspect of a story, just as you would, if you were telling it to someone. So I don't understand your gripe.
Reply ID 34900
quote:But they have just won some Local Newspaper awards [:)]
Originally posted by stevenquote:The gripe is the extremely poor level of journalism. Commenting on something doesn't mean it's automatically interesting.
Originally posted by xtra_xtra Does the Harry Potter link make it prejudicial? I don't think it does (but it's not up to me to decide that). I think it is an interesting fact about the case though - indeed it provoked you into commenting - which shows that even you are interested in it, despite your criticism. And it is understandable for newspapers to promote the most interesting aspect of a story, just as you would, if you were telling it to someone. So I don't understand your gripe.
Reply ID 34907
quote:True, but the awards were won by the Hoddesdon & Broxbourne and the Cheshunt Editions rather than by the Hertfordshire Mercury as such.
Originally posted by Ray_by_the_Beanequote:But they have just won some Local Newspaper awards [:)]
Originally posted by stevenquote:The gripe is the extremely poor level of journalism. Commenting on something doesn't mean it's automatically interesting.
Originally posted by xtra_xtra Does the Harry Potter link make it prejudicial? I don't think it does (but it's not up to me to decide that). I think it is an interesting fact about the case though - indeed it provoked you into commenting - which shows that even you are interested in it, despite your criticism. And it is understandable for newspapers to promote the most interesting aspect of a story, just as you would, if you were telling it to someone. So I don't understand your gripe.
Reply ID 34912
it's the same people tho!
Reply ID 34914
Nobody asked any readers, the panel was made up of "a team of independent and highly respected journalists" from what I can see.
Reply ID 34917
quote:Respected by who? [:D]
Originally posted by steven
Nobody asked any readers, the panel was made up of "a team of independent and highly respected journalists" from what I can see.
Reply ID 34919
quote:The winners
Originally posted by Stevequote:Respected by who? [:D]
Originally posted by steven
Nobody asked any readers, the panel was made up of "a team of independent and highly respected journalists" from what I can see.
Reply ID 34925
quote:What gripe? I made no judgement or comment, I simply noted a fact - a similarity (in the headline and the picture) between the Sun and the Merc in a story they both covered. Since you raise the issue, though, yes, I do think the standard of journalism in the Herts Mercury is abysmal and no amount of absurd tin-pot awards will ever persuade me that the Mercury is a quality local weekly until the journalism improves.
Originally posted by xtra_xtra
So I don't understand your gripe.