JO
Apparently A&S Police have complained to OFCOM about the report, calling it 'irresponsible'.
But to be honest, ITV News had every right to make that report - watching it last night I found myself agreeing with some of the sentiments that were brought up. The report seemed to suit a programme like 'Tonight' or 'Panorama', more investigative than focusing on the actual newest developments relating to the story, but still I didn't see any problem with it.
Of course ITV News has its problems editorially and to a lesser extent branding wise, not to mention Bill Neely's bizarre sign off on the Qatar report a few weeks ago. But with this situation, I think the report was justified.
But to be honest, ITV News had every right to make that report - watching it last night I found myself agreeing with some of the sentiments that were brought up. The report seemed to suit a programme like 'Tonight' or 'Panorama', more investigative than focusing on the actual newest developments relating to the story, but still I didn't see any problem with it.
Of course ITV News has its problems editorially and to a lesser extent branding wise, not to mention Bill Neely's bizarre sign off on the Qatar report a few weeks ago. But with this situation, I think the report was justified.
GS
I'm all for scrutiny of the police, but this isn't an issue where "sentiment" should be a factor.
If there are major holes in the police case, then this will come to light if and when someone comes to trial, or where they say they cannot go further in the investigation.
But this lady was found 11 days ago. ELEVEN.
It would be good for all concerned if they had a suspect and a watertight case - but that's not the way things always go so early into a murder case.
You can't fill 5 minutes of airtime with a so-called expert (who ISN'T an expert in this specific case) telling the nation that the police are all over the place and haven't a clue how to perform rudimentary investigation procedures.
That's what this man suggested - and what proof did he have of that?
After 11 days of Joanna in the headlines, ITV desperately grabbed for some kind of angle, and its blown up in their face.
Your sentiment, their sentiment - its all irrelevant.
You can't call the police to account when you don't know what they know or even where their investigation is heading. The responsible thing to do is to air the appeals for information and report on what you're being told or have learned.
Not to find a man who will make up a scandal in return for an appearance fee.
So if ITV are being complained about or publicly rebuked then its their own fault.
Gavin Scott
Founding member
But to be honest, ITV News had every right to make that report - watching it last night I found myself agreeing with some of the sentiments that were brought up. The report seemed to suit a programme like 'Tonight' or 'Panorama', more investigative than focusing on the actual newest developments relating to the story, but still I didn't see any problem with it.
I'm all for scrutiny of the police, but this isn't an issue where "sentiment" should be a factor.
If there are major holes in the police case, then this will come to light if and when someone comes to trial, or where they say they cannot go further in the investigation.
But this lady was found 11 days ago. ELEVEN.
It would be good for all concerned if they had a suspect and a watertight case - but that's not the way things always go so early into a murder case.
You can't fill 5 minutes of airtime with a so-called expert (who ISN'T an expert in this specific case) telling the nation that the police are all over the place and haven't a clue how to perform rudimentary investigation procedures.
That's what this man suggested - and what proof did he have of that?
After 11 days of Joanna in the headlines, ITV desperately grabbed for some kind of angle, and its blown up in their face.
Your sentiment, their sentiment - its all irrelevant.
You can't call the police to account when you don't know what they know or even where their investigation is heading. The responsible thing to do is to air the appeals for information and report on what you're being told or have learned.
Not to find a man who will make up a scandal in return for an appearance fee.
So if ITV are being complained about or publicly rebuked then its their own fault.
Last edited by Gavin Scott on 5 January 2011 6:11pm
SP
It's hardly one of the smallest - Bristol is a sizeable city. It's not like it's a rural backwater.
Still, I agree, ITN shouldn't have been banned. A referral to OFCOM would have been sufficient to show up ITV for its over-reliance on gossip, speculation and hear-say.
Wonder whether this whole investigation is a case of a provincial Police force way over its head, hence their sensitivity to criticism.
It's hardly one of the smallest - Bristol is a sizeable city. It's not like it's a rural backwater.
Still, I agree, ITN shouldn't have been banned. A referral to OFCOM would have been sufficient to show up ITV for its over-reliance on gossip, speculation and hear-say.
HO
If the police feel ITN/ ITV News are hindering their efforts, allegedly by misleading or misinforming the public, they have every right to block them from press conferences.
While I'm not saying ITV did mislead or misinform the public, it's right for the police to be able to take that decision if they feel this way. These press conferences are primarily for the police's purposes, after all.
While I'm not saying ITV did mislead or misinform the public, it's right for the police to be able to take that decision if they feel this way. These press conferences are primarily for the police's purposes, after all.
BR
This has probably turned more attention onto the police handling of this case. Seems like an over reaction to me.
TM
I’m not going to deny there are on-going issues with ITV News (accusations of sensationalism have been well documented on this forum before). But I really do not believe they specifically went out of their way to find some ‘expert’ who would raise concerns about the police investigation, simply to generate some sort of controversy or new angle around this story. I think to suggest otherwise is slightly disingenuous to ITV News, no matter what concerns we might share about its editorial standards.
In the majority of cases, these experts are approached and interviewed without prior knowledge of what they are going to say, and in that respect, it would actually have been quite remiss of ITV News not to broadcast those concerns, especially as they had been raised by a former murder squad detective.
As for the suggestion that police press conferences are ‘primarily for the police’s purposes’ – they are actually intended to be mutually beneficial to both police and media (otherwise it's unlikely the media would bother turning up to them).
The BBC’s Media Correspondent Torin Douglas has written an excellent and very succinct analysis on the BBC website (about half way down the page):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12122920
In the majority of cases, these experts are approached and interviewed without prior knowledge of what they are going to say, and in that respect, it would actually have been quite remiss of ITV News not to broadcast those concerns, especially as they had been raised by a former murder squad detective.
As for the suggestion that police press conferences are ‘primarily for the police’s purposes’ – they are actually intended to be mutually beneficial to both police and media (otherwise it's unlikely the media would bother turning up to them).
The BBC’s Media Correspondent Torin Douglas has written an excellent and very succinct analysis on the BBC website (about half way down the page):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12122920
LO
that said, I think the dailymail also published several articles criticising the operation - such as police not checking bins for the pizza box until it had been emptied. I'm not sure on timelines so I'm not sure if it is a valid point or not.
regardless of whether itv screened a report which was, shall we say tenuous at best, this for me sets a very, very worrying precedent which shouldn't be repeated.
if the police are being so over sensitive about the quality of their investigation and not allowing journalists to report it (or scarring journalists from reporting it for fear of not getting coverage in the future) could mean that potential miscarriages of justice could go unreported or facts about an unsafe or flawed investigation could go unreported. we need journalists to keep great big thunderous dinosaurs like the police in check.
I think the police made a very grave misjudgement here. even if the itn report was a poor piece of journalism, those concerns may have been legitimate and what then? and if not.... go to ofcom.... this just smells of an authoritarian banana republic. I don't think any of us want to live in a place like that.
regardless of whether itv screened a report which was, shall we say tenuous at best, this for me sets a very, very worrying precedent which shouldn't be repeated.
if the police are being so over sensitive about the quality of their investigation and not allowing journalists to report it (or scarring journalists from reporting it for fear of not getting coverage in the future) could mean that potential miscarriages of justice could go unreported or facts about an unsafe or flawed investigation could go unreported. we need journalists to keep great big thunderous dinosaurs like the police in check.
I think the police made a very grave misjudgement here. even if the itn report was a poor piece of journalism, those concerns may have been legitimate and what then? and if not.... go to ofcom.... this just smells of an authoritarian banana republic. I don't think any of us want to live in a place like that.
Last edited by lobster on 5 January 2011 8:06pm
GS
I'm sorry to be the one to say it, but its not uncommon for a journalist, documentary maker or editor to have an angle first, then seek an expert who will develop that for them. That's how it often is. Doesn't mean they're seeking controversy, just a story that will grip their audience.
It could be based on one person's mistaken view that the "no sexual assault/possible sexual motive" statement was a contradiction (when of course it wasn't), and then asked this expert to wander round the murder site pointing out areas where the police may have failed to do the job properly. That's more or less what we saw him do, and he was obviously there by ITV's invitation.
The way it was delivered really suggested there had been a total failure from the police, and it seemed to be based on one erroneous conclusion and bolstered by several pieces of speculation. I think most people that saw it would agree.
It really wasn't good journalism, and if I was the DCI I would have been pretty livid. Would I have spat the dummy and banned them from the next conference? Probably, and that's what he did too.
And that's his right as the man running the investigation.
It really shouldn't be confused with some kind of "police state" mentality, or that its the thin end of some totalitarian wedge. None of the material from the conference was covered up - they just didn't let ITN's cameras in, although they did allow ITV local to cover it.
Isn't it just a case of a pissed off inspector getting the hump? And if you've probably not slept much in the last 10 days as you try to solve a media saturated murder, isn't it understandable?
Gavin Scott
Founding member
But I really do not believe they specifically went out of their way to find some ‘expert’ who would raise concerns about the police investigation, simply to generate some sort of controversy or new angle around this story. I think to suggest otherwise is slightly disingenuous to ITV News, no matter what concerns we might share about its editorial standards.
I'm sorry to be the one to say it, but its not uncommon for a journalist, documentary maker or editor to have an angle first, then seek an expert who will develop that for them. That's how it often is. Doesn't mean they're seeking controversy, just a story that will grip their audience.
It could be based on one person's mistaken view that the "no sexual assault/possible sexual motive" statement was a contradiction (when of course it wasn't), and then asked this expert to wander round the murder site pointing out areas where the police may have failed to do the job properly. That's more or less what we saw him do, and he was obviously there by ITV's invitation.
The way it was delivered really suggested there had been a total failure from the police, and it seemed to be based on one erroneous conclusion and bolstered by several pieces of speculation. I think most people that saw it would agree.
It really wasn't good journalism, and if I was the DCI I would have been pretty livid. Would I have spat the dummy and banned them from the next conference? Probably, and that's what he did too.
And that's his right as the man running the investigation.
It really shouldn't be confused with some kind of "police state" mentality, or that its the thin end of some totalitarian wedge. None of the material from the conference was covered up - they just didn't let ITN's cameras in, although they did allow ITV local to cover it.
Isn't it just a case of a pissed off inspector getting the hump? And if you've probably not slept much in the last 10 days as you try to solve a media saturated murder, isn't it understandable?
TM
Gavin, I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this.
At the end of the day, the criticisms of the police investigation broadcast on NAT last night, came from a legitimate source (a former murder squad detective) so I think any broadcaster is within its rights to broadcast those concerns. And I think the way Avon & Somerset Police have responded, not only makes them look rather petty (whether they’re tired or not) … but it runs the risk of creating an environment where other journalists will now be reluctant to question anything relating to the investigation, for fear of being frozen out of future police briefings. Not a great day for press freedom.
At the end of the day, the criticisms of the police investigation broadcast on NAT last night, came from a legitimate source (a former murder squad detective) so I think any broadcaster is within its rights to broadcast those concerns. And I think the way Avon & Somerset Police have responded, not only makes them look rather petty (whether they’re tired or not) … but it runs the risk of creating an environment where other journalists will now be reluctant to question anything relating to the investigation, for fear of being frozen out of future police briefings. Not a great day for press freedom.