lee rigby half term draft

8/10/2019 Lee rigby half term draft

1/3

To what extent do journalists have over the freedom in which they have to publish a story? In

this report I will be discussing the ways in which journalists and the media sometimes dont

take into account the laws and ethics in which are presented when broadcasting or publishing

a story. I am analysing different genres of mediums such as TV, reporting and newspapers.

The first case study I wish to talk about is the brutal murdering of Lee Rigby the reports

which followed after this incident occurred sparked controversy due to the graphic scenes

shared with the country. In a video from ITV

News of the actual footage shown we could

see Michael Adebolajo standing which blood

stained hands and what looked like a meat

cleaver which was recorded by a passer-by.

Adebolajo gave a speech trying to reason with

the public about why he did what he had done

saying things like we only killed this man

today because youre killing Muslims every daybut was the media for example ITV News

breaching the watershed rules whereby graphic content or distressing imagery shouldnt be

shown before 9pm in case children are watching. ITV News received more than 400

complaints about this video making it the third most complained about programme of 2013.

[1]

In a report by BBC News and The Guardian they both referred to the men as Muslim

coverts[2]but is this opposing a thought on the public that because theyre Muslims now this

is why it has happened. We see a lot of stereotyping in the media in that they have wrote it

into the context of the story to direct our views in a certain way, there are rules against media

bias but against posing the question is it operating on the margins of the law or is it okay

because theyre not directly being discriminative over the Muslim religion. It has been found

that the number of racially aggravated abuse on Muslims has multiplied by ten times in the

following three days after the attack ranging from general verbal abuse, vandalising and

firebombing mosques[3].

In any coverage of a tragic event the way in which the journalists will leave out certain

details or specifically emphasise other parts of the story to put a portrayal onto the public.

Reports on murders are heard most daysbut that is all they are reports, they dont show


2/3

interviews/speeches with the murderer trying to justify his actions or the body of the victim

on the floor.

Yet on this particular day the way in which the broadcasters showed an amateur video maybe

wasnt applying the harm limitation factor onto the story which one rule is Show

compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special

sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects[4]as it wasnt

like any coverage that had ever been shown; it was clear why it sparked a controversial

debate amongst the public.

One argument is that some people feel that the footage itself has too much of graphic imagery

to be shown before the watershed and the fact someone had lost their life on that day the

reporters should have taken a thought for the family who will have had to see their loved one

lying dead on in the road whilst their killer was trying to justify his actions saying he was not

guilty of the crime which would have made the situation worse. As I mentioned previously

the harm limitation rule was therefore not applied but also this could have broken the

Contempt by Publication law in which the defendant who was trying to justify his actions

wont have been entitled to a fair trial whilst the broadcasters were describing how bad the

crime was and could be leaving out important information it is in the state of law illegal to

provide the suspect with an unfair trial in the court. As journalists are there to make money

we could assume that they only used this footage to gain more audience share in a way that

they brought us exclusive footage like no other broadcaster did on that day. Evidence to back

up this point is that ITV won the home news coverage and scoop of the year for this news

coverage as they provide the nation with this information minutes after Rigby was murdered.

[5]

However, in this society how can we define a journalist from a paper to someone that uploads

something that has happened to a social media site? In the world where proliferation of the

media is at its best it is now said that nine out of ten people own a mobile phone with over a

quarter of people using their mobile phones for internet access. The most important statistic I

found was that nearly six in ten mobile phone internet users visit social networking sites on

their mobile which makes it the most popular activity ahead of sending/receiving emails [6].

From this evidence it makes another point that traditional journalists who go out and find the

news stories they are looking for are now competing with the social media and viral reports in


3/3

which are being posted, journalists know exactly what they can and cant do and how to

report correctly for stories yet how can we stop someone sharing a story online and not

presenting a bias view towards it?

In addition, another view that has been proposed is that more terrorism has emerged from this

major event but there are no statistics to prove this theory however this may have been a

platform to inspire more terrorism in the UK. To back this up I found a story in that a Islamic

extremist Mizanur Rahman had announced to the home secretary that more Lee Rigby-style

atrocities on the streets of the UK if the government passes new laws to clampdown on

Muslim activists[7]. This suggests that if the UK government tries to cut down and bring in

the anti-social behaviour orders we could see many more soldiers paying the price for what is

happening overseas.

On the other hand, people may argue though that the world in which we live now we are

accustomed to hearing about murders and wars being fought so its in the interest of the

public to hear about what is going on and thats what we need journalists for.The fact that

ITV News played the justification of the killer means that the audience could have a better

understanding of his beliefs and why he did what he did but this could cause controversy in

itself because others may not agree with the actions of this faith in such an overpowering

way.

[1]http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/ofcom-lee-rigby-coverage-helps-make-itv-news-third-

most-complained-about-programme-2013

[2]http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/19/lee-rigby-killing-woolwich-verdict-

convicted-murder

[3] http://metro.co.uk/2013/05/25/abuse-of-muslims-increases-tenfold-since-woolwich-attack-on-

lee-rigby-claims-watchdog-3808485/

[4]http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/contempt.htm

[5]http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/feb/20/itv-news-channel-4-dispatches-rts

[6]http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2011/a-nation-addicted-to-smartphones/

http://www.slideshare.net/ahobbs2/week-28-lee-rigby-killing

[7]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/islamic-extremist-warns-more-lee-4368546

http://www.slideshare.net/stoliros/regulation-and-control?related=1
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/ofcom-lee-rigby-coverage-helps-make-itv-news-third-most-complained-about-programme-2013http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/ofcom-lee-rigby-coverage-helps-make-itv-news-third-most-complained-about-programme-2013http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/ofcom-lee-rigby-coverage-helps-make-itv-news-third-most-complained-about-programme-2013http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/ofcom-lee-rigby-coverage-helps-make-itv-news-third-most-complained-about-programme-2013http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/19/lee-rigby-killing-woolwich-verdict-convicted-murderhttp://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/19/lee-rigby-killing-woolwich-verdict-convicted-murderhttp://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/19/lee-rigby-killing-woolwich-verdict-convicted-murderhttp://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/contempt.htmhttp://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/contempt.htmhttp://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/contempt.htmhttp://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/feb/20/itv-news-channel-4-dispatches-rtshttp://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/feb/20/itv-news-channel-4-dispatches-rtshttp://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/feb/20/itv-news-channel-4-dispatches-rtshttp://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2011/a-nation-addicted-to-smartphones/http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2011/a-nation-addicted-to-smartphones/http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2011/a-nation-addicted-to-smartphones/http://www.slideshare.net/ahobbs2/week-28-lee-rigby-killinghttp://www.slideshare.net/ahobbs2/week-28-lee-rigby-killinghttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/islamic-extremist-warns-more-lee-4368546http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/islamic-extremist-warns-more-lee-4368546http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/islamic-extremist-warns-more-lee-4368546http://www.slideshare.net/stoliros/regulation-and-control?related=1http://www.slideshare.net/stoliros/regulation-and-control?related=1http://www.slideshare.net/stoliros/regulation-and-control?related=1http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/islamic-extremist-warns-more-lee-4368546http://www.slideshare.net/ahobbs2/week-28-lee-rigby-killinghttp://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2011/a-nation-addicted-to-smartphones/http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/feb/20/itv-news-channel-4-dispatches-rtshttp://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/contempt.htmhttp://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/19/lee-rigby-killing-woolwich-verdict-convicted-murderhttp://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/19/lee-rigby-killing-woolwich-verdict-convicted-murderhttp://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/ofcom-lee-rigby-coverage-helps-make-itv-news-third-most-complained-about-programme-2013http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/content/ofcom-lee-rigby-coverage-helps-make-itv-news-third-most-complained-about-programme-2013

lee rigby half term draft

Documents