Is This Necessary?

[Jay]

Reading some of the articles in the local press recently has made me wonder if it really is necessary to publish a story which in all probability will cause a bereaved family more anguish and heartache .

An inquiry into the care of young people on the island was told that there were suspicions that a murdered kid was a prostitute. While I've no doubt that the purpose of the inquiry is valid, and I agree that the care of young people is of paramount importance, I really do question the role of the press and the medias responsibility in matters such as this.

Anyone having read the terrible account of the murder a couple of years ago will realise that it must have had a devestating effect on her family and friends. To now read stuff like this in the local rag will surely serve to add more anguish on those that knew her.

I realise that the inquiry was 'fair game', and as such the press are entitled to report it, but to what end and at what expense?

There have been other items in the past that have made me think it was bad taste to have been put in print, but this latest news(?) item takes the biscuit.

I doubt such a story does much to increase reader figures, those who buy a local paper will probably do so whether or not such stories are published. But I don't doubt that reading such stuff will have made the already distraught family feel a whole lot worse.

That can't be right.

[Declan]

Strange they weren't so keen to report on the Mount Murrey Inquiry's evidence!

 

I see your point, but I guess the family would be following the inquiry anyway, so it won't be a shock. I suppose it would depend how materially important the information was, and how the paper handled the story. Not seen it, was it sensitively done and relevant or was it prurient tittle-tattle?

[ste1205]

It is a public enquiry and if it was not reported in the local media then most people would not get to hear how appalling the care system was on the Island at that point. The press seem to be devoting as much space to this as they did the Mount Murray inquiry so I don’t think they being sensationalist in their coverage.

 

I am a product of the local care system – having been resident in Dalmeny when it was operated by NCH and social services in the late 70’s and early 80’s. Like the majority of the other residents I was there because breakdown of the family home and most of the time it was a very happy experience –not that I would admit it at the time. It seems a world apart from the current care system.

 

I only hope that some good comes out of it.

[Jay]

I see your point, but I guess the family would be following the inquiry anyway, so it won't be a shock. I suppose it would depend how materially important the information was, and how the paper handled the story. Not seen it, was it sensitively done and relevant or was it prurient tittle-tattle?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I imagine the family would be following the inquiry, and in all honesty I wouldn't really consider the item as sensationalist.

The information given to and considered by the inquiry will almost certainly be considered important and may well be very relevent when it comes to apportioning blame and learning lessons on how best to care for young people.

But I consider it insensitive to publish details such as those included in the story and question the purpose and necessity in publishing them.

[ButterflyMaiden]

But I consider it insensitive to publish details such as those included in the story and question the purpose and necessity in publishing them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think most people would agree.

Having said that .. it is undoubtedly a hard judgement for newspaper editors to make.

[Grumble]

Don't shoot the messenger...

 

I remember at the time of the murder trial the families of the victims were up in arms about the failures of social services, landlords, police, the courts - just about anyone. 'He/She was a good boy/girl but misunderstood' was not the opinion of many people who knew more about it than me.

 

IMHO it's vital that this is reported in full so that we can all see what our care system is about, and it's fascinating just how little control was exerted and how much influence our politicians wielded in matters.

 

It's all very well wringing your hands about the tragedy of this situation for ALL concerned, but the more I hear, the more I think these kids should have been in jail - to protect them AND society in general.

 

I'm not suggesting that we can't all go off the tracks a little at times, and deserve sensitive and appropriate guidance in times of trouble - but this was a train wreck waiting to happen.

 

And if the papers DIDN'T report it, there'd be threads here about freedom of information, useless local media and numerous conspiracy theories.

[Jay]

Don't shoot the messenger........etc,etc

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The only point I was trying to make is whether it was necessary to refer to parts of the inquiry regarding that someone suspected the murdered teenager was a prostituting herself to fund a drug habit. Does publishing things like that serve the public interest?

IMHO I dont see the publishing of details like that serving any usefull purpose.

[Lonan3]

Although I would normally defend the freedom of the press to print the facts, I do think that a greater degree of sensitivity should be applied in cases such as this. It is not so much the fact of the family hearing the facts presented at the inquiry - I'd hazard a guess that they were aware of them anyway - but that something like this, about their late daughter, was then presented in the local papers for the rest of the population to read. As they are hardly competing against anyone else for circulation, I honestly think that they could have found a way of avoiding any direct mention of this matter without attracting criticism - other than from a few idiots who might employ it as support for their conspiracy theories.

[Addie]

It must hurt the families of these young people to have things dragged up yet again.

 

But, I expect that they need to know all that happened too.

 

It's so tragic that two young people died before they ever had the benefits that most of us take for granted, or a decent chance to grow up.

 

They were in the care of the authorities yet seemed enmeshed in a sub-culture that seeks to deny youngsters of their dreams, health and future.

 

It's desperately important that whatever went wrong here, is discovered in order to try and prevent anything like this ever happening again.

 

These young people, and even the youngster who killed, have been badly let down. They're not born that way. Something's happened to them to turn them all into the lost souls they became.

 

No matter ow sad, let's all listen and learn from this. We owe them that at least.

[Bill Posters]

Excellent post. I've read this thread and been giving it a lot of thought.

 

You've summed it up very well.

[Jay]

Very well said Addie and a very good post. I agree with every thing you said, in particular..

.........I expect that they need to know all that happened too..........

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would say they have an absolute right to know all the facts heard by and taken into account by the inquiry into the death of their daughter. Additionally I suggest that they, along with their murdered daughter, also have a right to be treated with some respect, dignity and sensitivity.

As Declan said earlier in the the thread, the family have probably been following the inquiry and therefore would be privvy to its findings.

 

I suggest that they would have had no need or desire to read about it in the newspaper.

[WilDDog]

I suggest that they would have had no need or desire to read about it in the newspaper.

 

And I suggest you're right.

[Grumble]

The point is that the newspapers and radio aren't doing anything apart from reporting exactly what is being said in the Inquiry - they're certainly not sensationalising anything.

 

The testimony heard so far from various witnesses has been dynamite, and will be making a lot of taxpayers wonder what the hell's been going on.

[Observer]

What bugs me is how selective the reporting is over here, as Declan suggested above ref Mount Murray.

 

On some (safe) things it appears you get all the gory details and yet on others... well you know the score.

[Lonan3]

.

 

"Put her in Ramsey because I dont like Alan Bell MHK" is absolutely obnoxious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Perhaps... if true - but vehemently denied I believe, and it's probably best to reserve judgement on that one until the person concerned has a chance to answer it.