Bridgend coverage criticised by police

The press is in serious ethical trouble for its coverage of the growing number of suicides that have been recorded in the medium-sized town of Bridgend in South Wales, yesterday coming under especially harsh criticism from the police.

A quick summary of what the press has been accused of by various sources, before I begin the story proper:

• representing suicide as a way of achieving recognition and fitting into part of a trend
• troubling the families of those involved in a cavalier manner
• misreading a series of tragic but not unusual events as a ‘story’
• dramatizing events, misusing their emotional content
• emphasizing regional stereotypes

The question that all the recent coverage has been implying is ‘Can you cover a terrible subject without at some level promoting it?’ It's an old problem, raised most often today by various forms of terrorist activities, for which I certainly don't have an answer, and as far as I can tell from reading the papers, neither does anyone really.

At today's press conference, an excerpt from which was broadcast on Channel 4, Asst Chief Constable Dave Morris (above right) calmly explained that no evidence had been found suggesting that an external force had encouraged these young people to take their lives.

He held up the front page from the South Wales Echo which bore the headline ‘REWARD OFFERED FOR SUICIDE LINK PROOF’, and then picked up a cutting from the Sunday express and commented on the layout, which emphasised the number of deaths by showing the faces of the dead around the edge of the page, and read from the intro which claimed ‘The suicide town of Bridgend is hiding a grim secret.’ He said bitterly:

‘What secret is that? I don't know. Maybe the press can tell me.’

Aside from the characterisation of Bridgend as the ‘suicide town,’ ACC Morris didn't remark on the embarassing use of the word 'Bid' in the headline on that page from the Express: ‘8 more suicide bids.’ That quirky example of journalese has a real ability to trivialize anything it's applied to.

As I've already said, I don't claim to have any answers, so let's look back at some of the coverage of these events.

Yesterday's Independent used the words of the mother of Nathaniel Pritchard, a boy who died last week. She was speaking at today's press conference. Before referring to the press's role in shaping events, the article noted she had a more basic criticism:

Nathaniel Pritchard's mother described media coverage both before and after her son's death as ‘extremely intrusive.’

She said: ‘We did not wish to speak to the media about our son's death but feel that we have to, not just for our family but other families in the Bridgend area who have lost loved ones suddenly.’

Moving on, she then blamed the press for actually glamorising the deaths:

‘We feel (the) media's coverage could trigger other young people, who are already vulnerable and feeling low, into attempting to take their own lives.

‘Media coverage put the idea in Nathaniel's head. We feel he was influenced by media coverage.

‘We feel it has glamorised ways of taking your life as a way of getting attention without fully realising the tragic consequences.’

One way of judging whether a sequence of events is in the public interest and therefore newsworthy is to see whether once identified it is at odds with the norms of the area. ‘Norm’ is a cold word to use, but perhaps the simplest.

BBC News had this to say on recent figures for deaths of young people in the area:

‘Latest statistics available from the Office for National Statistics show that there were three suicides in 2004-2005 in the Bridgend area for those aged between 15 and 30, and three in 2006.’

So according to that, the 17 deaths of young people in a year would be several times the rate seen in recent years and therefore of interest. The difficulty in making such judgments is highlighted by the words of a local journalist from Bridgend writing in yesterday's Guardian, who had quite a different set of figures:

‘The sad fact is that 16 suicides among young people in Bridgend in 12 months is no worse than usual. There were 13 suicides by young people in 2007, and 21 in total. In 2006 the total was 28 [...] One suicide a month in a good year; one every three weeks in a poor one. Men aged 16-35 are most at risk. The profile has been the same for years.’

However, having noted that the figures didn't add up to a story, he also found the press' desire to make a story disturbing, citing a different reason for his feelings - explaining that the press were exploiting these people's lives as emotional capital:

‘The profile has been the same for years - young men from poor areas, often with dismal prospects. That might be the reality, but speculation is more exciting. Had he just been dumped? Was he worried about exams? Was he being bullied?

‘It is telling that Bridgend hit the headlines only when the 13th victim, Natasha Randall, was linked to one of the boys by a photograph. She was pretty girl who, as every report said, had her “whole life ahead of her.” Until then, it wasn't much of a story.’

Many of the problems highlighted in relation to this coverage show how narrow the division between telling a story and interpreting one. Journalism is still a minefield after all these years.

'Not just talking the bullshit, but actually living the bullshit'

Here's a US general election report from The Onion that mocks the public as much as it does pandering politicians, making for a vicious and heartfelt piece of satire:

‘When it comes to electing the leader of the free world, voters look to issues like a candidate's relationship with their ex-wife, did they ever smoke, where do they vacation, what's their exercise regimen. These are the kind of core bullshit issues that people really care about.’

New standard set for video satire

For those who think that Mad TV is the height of satire, this year the New York print and online publication The Onion has once again moved the satire goalposts: it has set up the Onion News Network video news site.

Viral videos frequently use satire or ironically post laughable ‘serious’ clips from news programmes putting forward extreme viewpoints, but ONN's excellent production values and actors are the best I have seen, extending perfectly the deadpan style of the long-running print and online editions.

The joy of watching is when you reach that particular point after the first few seconds of each story at which the starched suits, stern expressions and searching interview questions are revealed to be acting under some insane logic.

This beats the hit-and-miss humour of Burbank and has only been exceeded by Brass Eye to my knowledge. Let's hope they keep this venture going.

Inheritance stacks

The piling up of the post-conference reporting on the two leading parties' to-ing and fro-ing on inheritance laws is now likely to have an impact on another financial issue that could affect the Tories before they get anywhere near No 10.

One wonders whether today's loss of £8m from the Tory piggy bank was judged in favour of the benefactor's family largely on account of one particular "delusional" statement he made about Margaret Thatcher, who he called

‘the greatest leader of the free world in history.’

The judge's ruling may then be even more political than you might first assume - not only did the ruling lose £8m of what could be a much-needed future election fund, but recent Tory policy makes an appeal against the ruling unlikely. Which party would want to be seen to be attempting to prise money out of the hands of a dead man's family, just at a time when it has pledged to raise the tax threshold so that

‘In a Conservative Britain you will not be punished for working hard and saving hard.’

No, that would never do.

99 Red Balloons... and One Blue One

The increasingly media-savvy conservatives playing the song ‘99 Red Balloons’ and marching around Westminster today wearing Gordon Brown masks in honour of Labour's 99 ‘stealth taxes’ (god I hate this oppositional expression) are probably quite aware that they're making a double protest.

So there's these apparently sneaky taxes, but there's also the ‘stealth’ message of at least the principle of opposition to the Iraq war, to which the Cons are publically opposed, and which is the subject of Nena's song about an accidental and unnecessary war:

99 Decision Street
99 ministers meet
To worry, worry, super-scurry
Call the troops out in a hurry
This is what we've waited for
This is it boys, this is war
The president is on the line
As 99 red balloons go by

BBC's Iraq Week begins

‘A new poll out today shows that Iraqis are increasingly insecure and pessimistic about their future’, says the lead News 24 story today. Well, who would have thought?

But still, the Beeb are to be commended for their decision to increase their coverage, when studies have shown that many viewers report ‘tuning out’ when war coverage appears on the main news broadcasts.

It was refreshing this morning to see Huw Edwards back out on the front line, and to see behind the scenes of the coverage, where video editing equipment sits in tents protected only by five second mortar warning alerts. This is one of many ways in which the Beeb is finding a new angle, and doing it in a useful way.

I realised just a few minutes ago, at 13:09 local time, Baghdad, that the interview I was watching with Baghdad citizen Usama Ridha was the only interview with ‘the man on the street’ I had seen in a long time (Months? A Year?) which wasn't in the immediate aftermath of a bombing, or some other kind of attack on one side or another.

These interviews are what the BBC calls the ‘My Iraq’ segments. Just talking to people on the ground to give a picture of what life is like rather than just what a certain bombing has resulted in (which we can guess without help) is a much-needed fresh approach from a return to more traditional journalism.

1997 Week: ‘Panorama Revisited’

BBC 4's mini-series on the Blair years, the ‘1997 Week’ programmes, continued with tonight's superbly effective political piece, ‘Panorama Revisited’.

By the simple conceit of looking back at clips from the Panorama programmes broadcast that year and then having the ever-charming Jeremy Vine give ‘what happened next’ updates, we could see simply how well Labour had lived up to their promises. The short answer is ‘Not very well.’

Labour succeeded in making considerable reforms to the the role of the monarchy and its public representation, and in the advancement of gay rights, ultimately leading to the introduction of civil partnerships in 2005. But in terms of tests provided by more conventional political problems, weaknesses have abounded. Some choice moments:

Mandelson, 1997: ‘It's wonderful to have a discussion with a group of people and see so many great ideas being put forward [for what should be in the dome]. I really think this is going to be a success.’

Street interviewer, 1997: ‘What do you want to say to the people up there trying to work out what to put inside the dome?’
Man on the street: ‘They should burn it down.’

Jeremy Vine, 2007: ‘The dome's biggest problem was that it was trivial. Half the expected number of people turned up.’

John Prescott, 1997, interviewed about the dismal efficiency and safety record of the tube: ‘I've been in office for about six weeks now ... Talk to me again in five years.’

Jeremy Vine, 2007: ‘Five years later, the tube was facing its worst figures in history. Mr Prescott had been relieved of his duties on the matter.’