Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Mass stabbing at Southport Kids’ Club 29/7/24

SpookyFrank said:
He expressly said that he released the guy's name in response to misinformation.

So the fash have learned that they can leverage state actors to act against protocol just by kicking off and smashing shit. I'm sure that will end well.
Click to expand...
Specifically, by deliberately concocting and spreading misinformation that stokes street violence.
 
SpookyFrank said:
He expressly said that he released the guy's name in response to misinformation.

So the fash have learned that they can leverage state actors to act against protocol just by kicking off and smashing shit. I'm sure that will end well.
Click to expand...

It’s not against protocol and has nothing to do with “the fash”. Judges can lift reporting restrictions if they deem it to be in the public interest. There are many examples of this having happened without the involvement of the far right, most obviously in case of the killers of Jamie Bulger.

What’s slightly unusual (though not unprecedented) here is that they’ve named a suspect rather than a convict, but that’s likely due to the fact that there’s no doubt that he did it and he’s almost 18 anyway.
 
Last edited:
Being reported that the suspect once appeared in a children in need promotional video aged 11. Now of course the BBC bashers will be making something of this.
 
Rompipalle said:
I doubt it would even occur to me to look, even if I had access to such information.
Click to expand...
Well as a researcher working for a major broadcaster and maybe on a news programme I'd guess it would come naturally to them
 
Last edited:
ddraig said:
It's a fact though, how is it muck racking?
Click to expand...
I’m not disputing whether it’s factual or not. It’s simply the act of looking into someone’s past that’s known as muck-raking, particularly if that person has done something shocking. Even if there turns out to be nothing of note, it’s the intent that makes it muck-raking.

You don’t think that anyone engaged in such “research” - regardless of who the subject is - isn’t always hoping for something significant, but preferably scandalous, to report?
 
Rompipalle said:
I’m sure that comment means something to you but without context it seems somewhat pointless.
Click to expand...
Yeh so do so many posts. If you think there's something special, some point to all this, you should know now that all of this is pointless. But maybe try to read posts in context - my 462 in relation to your 458 - and I'm fairly sure that between now and the morning you'll see the point I'm making.
 
Pickman's model said:
Yeh so do so many posts. If you think there's something special, some point to all this, you should know now that all of this is pointless. But maybe try to read posts in context - my 462 in relation to your 458 - and I'm fairly sure that between now and the morning you'll see the point I'm making.
Click to expand...
No, if you can't give a straight answer without rude or cryptic comments, I don't think I'll bother.
 
Rompipalle said:
I doubt it would even occur to me to look, even if I had access to such information.
Click to expand...
Tbh, the way their databases work, if someone entered keywords and reporter's and/or presenter's names and the suspect's name while logging a 'recent' image/video for use in a news bulletin, and then an hour or so later or the following day another producer is searching for that recent multimedia content by searching for his unusual name, there's a possibility that the system threw up older files along with the current content that had been logged with that name, along with other key information, date, time, 'story name' (slug), etc.

Or then again, given his unusual name and how some BBC staffers have longterm careers in the corporation, it's possible the name rang a bell with someone who'd been involved in recording/broadcasting the older stuff, and then they ran a search of archives because they thought there might be something there.

I doubt someone thought 'Let's check the archives just on the off-chance that we might randomly have some footage of him from years ago.'
 
AnnO'Neemus said:
Tbh, the way their databases work, if someone entered keywords and reporter's and/or presenter's names and the suspect's name while logging a 'recent' image/video for use in a news bulletin, and then an hour or so later or the following day another producer is searching for that recent multimedia content by searching for his unusual name, there's a possibility that the system threw up older files along with the current content that had been logged with that name, along with other key information, date, time, 'story name' (slug), etc.

Or then again, given his unusual name and how some BBC staffers have longterm careers in the corporation, it's possible the name rang a bell with someone who'd been involved in recording/broadcasting the older stuff, and then they ran a search of archives because they thought there might be something there.

I doubt someone thought 'Let's check the archives just on the off-chance that we might randomly have some footage of him from years ago.'
Click to expand...
Thank you for your courteous reply. 🙂 This supports my view that I was never cut out for a career in any branch of journalism.
 
Rompipalle said:
How do people find this sort of stuff out?
Click to expand...
Every news media organisation has a library of media (video, photos etc) each of which is labelled with who is in it, who made it, what it is, when it is, any legal notes etc.

When you consider that there are around 1,200 local media titles in the UK and that around three-quarters are owned by just six companies, and that three companies control the national titles which represent 90% of circulation, that's a lot of access to picture captions of kids receiving Best Painting rosettes at their local summer fete, or angry councillors pointing at potholes, or disgraced vicars leaving a court - stretching back decades - for the researcher to draw on when years later some otherwise undistinguished person is connected to a newsworthy incident.
 
DaveCinzano said:
Every news media organisation has a library of media (video, photos etc) each of which is labelled with who is in it, who made it, what it is, when it is, any legal notes etc.

When you consider that there are around 1,200 local media titles in the UK and that around three-quarters are owned by just six companies, and that three companies control the national titles which represent 90% of circulation, that's a lot of access to picture captions of kids receiving Best Painting rosettes at their local summer fete, or angry councillors pointing at potholes, or disgraced vicars leaving a court - stretching back decades - for the researcher to draw on when years later some otherwise undistinguished person is connected to a newsworthy incident.
Click to expand...
You see, you and AnnO'Neemus have both demonstrated that it really IS possible to give a straight, non-sarcastic response to a perfectly non-contentious post. Thank you. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tim
Leeds uprising 18/7/24
2 3 4
Replies
102
Views
5K
two sheds
two sheds
P
Three injured in school stabbing in Wales (24/4/24)
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
GarveyLives
G
ouirdeaux
Stabbings in Leicester Square 12/08/24
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
5K
skyscraper101
skyscraper101
Agrippa57
Far-right response to Southport Outrage And Ongoing Violent Disorder
153 154 155 156 157
Replies
5K
Views
190K
Elpenor
E
BristolEcho
Modern Slavery at TN Trawlers
Replies
5
Views
303
CNT36
C
Back
Top Bottom