Another Red Arrows mishap? (merged)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon Rennie
I well written thought provoking post...probably deserves a slightly more thoughtful riposte than the one it got.
I suggest to most of us, it would make very little difference as to how we a told a loved one has gone...in some circumstances learning the "wrong" way can be a blessing in disguise.
The essence of this case seems to be the DMs (a newspaper I loathe with a passion) wilful, or ignorant, dismissal of the families feelings. A different kettle of fish I venture, and one that is pretty impossible to defend.
I well written thought provoking post...probably deserves a slightly more thoughtful riposte than the one it got.
I suggest to most of us, it would make very little difference as to how we a told a loved one has gone...in some circumstances learning the "wrong" way can be a blessing in disguise.
The essence of this case seems to be the DMs (a newspaper I loathe with a passion) wilful, or ignorant, dismissal of the families feelings. A different kettle of fish I venture, and one that is pretty impossible to defend.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 82
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also despise the DM, though unfortunately I have to buy it for the Boss (Mrs CM). However, my gut feeling is that, in this particular case, it was probably cock-up rather than conspiracy.
The article they published on the web was withdrawn within the hour, only to be reinstated a couple of hours later. It was a fairly factual article with a photo of Sean not readily available to the public. It looked to me to have come from a MoD source.
I suspect that MoD PInfo may have given the details to editors to ensure accuracy, but with the request not to publish until given the OK. Editorial staffs prepared the article, but some twit then pressed the wrong button and it went on line. It was quickly taken down, but the damage having already been done, the DM editors decided they might as well go ahead anyway, so they republished.
This would make them sloppy and unprofessional but not malevolent.
The article they published on the web was withdrawn within the hour, only to be reinstated a couple of hours later. It was a fairly factual article with a photo of Sean not readily available to the public. It looked to me to have come from a MoD source.
I suspect that MoD PInfo may have given the details to editors to ensure accuracy, but with the request not to publish until given the OK. Editorial staffs prepared the article, but some twit then pressed the wrong button and it went on line. It was quickly taken down, but the damage having already been done, the DM editors decided they might as well go ahead anyway, so they republished.
This would make them sloppy and unprofessional but not malevolent.
Whilst I hold no remit for the DM, nor any other newspaper, I cannot help but feel this thread has all got abit off track. Is it possible to separate press bashing (with which I would usually concur) from condolences, commiserations and memories of Red 5. Just a thought.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watford
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No of course not, that would not be my preference or anyone elses but you miss my point. We don't live in a perfect world and never will but in my own little way I would just prefer the wider worry is kept to a minimum if possible. Disaterous news however it arrives will always be disaterous news, simply a personal choice if I was the centre of the issue. I would add I will never forget the phone ringing in my little self employed office is it a client or that call I don't want or if the carer had come through the door, it would not have made the day any better!
The appearance of the pilot's name on line could perhaps be down to a minion pressing the wrong button. The presence of Daily Mail reporters at the family's front door in time for it to be reported in the morning edition could not.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The appearance of the pilot's name on line could perhaps be down to a minion pressing the wrong button. The presence of Daily Mail reporters at the family's front door in time for it to be reported in the morning edition could not."
Are you saying that they turned up at the front door of Red 5's home or what has happened in the past in general ? (Asking as I didn't see that reported).
Are you saying that they turned up at the front door of Red 5's home or what has happened in the past in general ? (Asking as I didn't see that reported).
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: England
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am as angry about the DM's action in this case as anyone else on the forum, unlike most other 'pruners my background is as a member of the press.
For us, not being the source of a NOK finding out about the death of a loved one was a matter of company policy that had no room for negotiation. I came close a couple of times, but it was always cock-up rather than conspiracy as has been noted.
In this case it reads as if the NOK had been informed but asked for some more time, possibly to contact another relative who was proving difficult to reach. Remember that as Red 5 was married even his parents would not count as NOK but they too deserve to hear this dreadful news through proper, dignified channels.
Contrary to popular belief the biggest danger is not that a relative reads the news on the DM website, or sees it in the paper, it's that a friend who has read it calls to offer condolences only to find out they are inadvertently delivering the bad news, making the relative feel like they are the last to hear of the event that will change their lives for ever.
'People matter and stories don't' was my basic feeling on the issue, which is probably why I was never particularly successful at the job.
For us, not being the source of a NOK finding out about the death of a loved one was a matter of company policy that had no room for negotiation. I came close a couple of times, but it was always cock-up rather than conspiracy as has been noted.
In this case it reads as if the NOK had been informed but asked for some more time, possibly to contact another relative who was proving difficult to reach. Remember that as Red 5 was married even his parents would not count as NOK but they too deserve to hear this dreadful news through proper, dignified channels.
Contrary to popular belief the biggest danger is not that a relative reads the news on the DM website, or sees it in the paper, it's that a friend who has read it calls to offer condolences only to find out they are inadvertently delivering the bad news, making the relative feel like they are the last to hear of the event that will change their lives for ever.
'People matter and stories don't' was my basic feeling on the issue, which is probably why I was never particularly successful at the job.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am as angry about the DM's action in this case as anyone else on the forum, unlike most other 'pruners my background is as a member of the press.
A friend of mine was unfortuante enough to have his daughter murdered during the Hungerford massacre (as it was called at the time). She was one of many victims of the crime. The press would simply not take "NO!" for an answer. Days and weeks after the event, some one would telephone, or call round to his house, trying to get my friend to talk to the press about his daughter, her life, his reactions to the event etc. They simply could not seem to understand that they did not want to talk to the press at all. At the anniversary of two, three six months, they turned up on his doorstep in an attempt to get an interview. This was followed by annual calls up to the point where the fifth anniversary was reached.
The press would simply let him and his wife alone. So the temtptation to steal a march on their competitors drives their willingness to intrude where they are clearly not wanted. As it happened, my friend had absolutely no idea that his daughter was in that town on that day, so if her name had been printed before he knew, I can only guess at the upset it would have caused.
In the case of Red 5 thousands of people know the names of not the individuals concerned with the team, so there might be some justification for early publication of the name of the deceased, but not before the family have been told.
"The appearance of the pilot's name on line could perhaps be down to a minion pressing the wrong button. The presence of Daily Mail reporters at the family's front door in time for it to be reported in the morning edition could not."
Are you saying that they turned up at the front door of Red 5's home or what has happened in the past in general ? (Asking as I didn't see that reported).
Yes.
The story printed in the next morning's edition of the DM proudly recounted that their reporters had been turned away from the family home by "an MOD Official"
Good for him.
Are you saying that they turned up at the front door of Red 5's home or what has happened in the past in general ? (Asking as I didn't see that reported).
Yes.
The story printed in the next morning's edition of the DM proudly recounted that their reporters had been turned away from the family home by "an MOD Official"
Good for him.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,902
Received 2,834 Likes
on
1,210 Posts
The story printed in the next morning's edition of the DM proudly recounted that their reporters had been turned away from the family home by "an MOD Official"
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 78
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DM Reprters
I and many of my service colleagues will never forgive or forget the day the DM published a photograph of my good friend Laurie Davies' body on fire in a gutter in a Cambridge housing area
They had crashed a Canberra at night from Wyton
The Journo was called Geoff Garrat
He justified the photo by saying of interest to the public and then published again in the AP.
Sadly I was never able to leave him somewhere horrid on Christmas eve
They had crashed a Canberra at night from Wyton
The Journo was called Geoff Garrat
He justified the photo by saying of interest to the public and then published again in the AP.
Sadly I was never able to leave him somewhere horrid on Christmas eve
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DM has form on all this.
At the outbreak of GW1, I was (for my sins - and, in retrospect, not proud) the newly appointed Defence Correspondent at the DM. When the first Tornados were shot down, the DM went into overdrive vis-a-vis the crews and their backgrounds, including doorstepping the relatives. Please bear in mind that this was the product of instructions from the News Editor and nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the specialist correspondent.
Once the paper started publishing details of family, etc, I marched into the Editor's office (Sir David English) to point out that this would not help if the crews were 1) interrogated (hopefully you understand what I am saying here) and; 2) if they were placed on public display. And I told him why.
I was, therefore, present when he called in the News Editor and told him, in no uncertain terms, that the hounds were to be called off - without saying exactly why. (I suspect he felt that this was 'need to know'.)
Now we know what subsequently happened. I continued in my belief that the Editor's instructions were being obeyed, so it came as a huge surprise, some time after the end of GW1, when I found myself chatting to one of those who were paraded on TV who, in no uncertain terms, told me he would not speak to anybody from the DM as their reporters had continued to doorstep his wife for weeks!
I should add, too, that as the specialist correspondent, I wrote what I wrote as honestly as possible. On more than one occasion I was forced to defend my reputation by showing the subject the original, as submitted by me, compared to what had appeared in the rag over my byline - with changes that had been made without my knowledge and which I only saw once they were in print!
To be honest, agreeing to move to the DM was the biggest mistake of my career post leaving the services. I subsequently left the journalism game, totally, a few years later: it seemed that integrity was a word that was unknown in most of the press.
At the outbreak of GW1, I was (for my sins - and, in retrospect, not proud) the newly appointed Defence Correspondent at the DM. When the first Tornados were shot down, the DM went into overdrive vis-a-vis the crews and their backgrounds, including doorstepping the relatives. Please bear in mind that this was the product of instructions from the News Editor and nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the specialist correspondent.
Once the paper started publishing details of family, etc, I marched into the Editor's office (Sir David English) to point out that this would not help if the crews were 1) interrogated (hopefully you understand what I am saying here) and; 2) if they were placed on public display. And I told him why.
I was, therefore, present when he called in the News Editor and told him, in no uncertain terms, that the hounds were to be called off - without saying exactly why. (I suspect he felt that this was 'need to know'.)
Now we know what subsequently happened. I continued in my belief that the Editor's instructions were being obeyed, so it came as a huge surprise, some time after the end of GW1, when I found myself chatting to one of those who were paraded on TV who, in no uncertain terms, told me he would not speak to anybody from the DM as their reporters had continued to doorstep his wife for weeks!
I should add, too, that as the specialist correspondent, I wrote what I wrote as honestly as possible. On more than one occasion I was forced to defend my reputation by showing the subject the original, as submitted by me, compared to what had appeared in the rag over my byline - with changes that had been made without my knowledge and which I only saw once they were in print!
To be honest, agreeing to move to the DM was the biggest mistake of my career post leaving the services. I subsequently left the journalism game, totally, a few years later: it seemed that integrity was a word that was unknown in most of the press.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A very revealing post, Gerontocrat. It should be enough to cause all readers of this forum to desist any spurious urge to buy said DM - even for the missus.
Unfortunately, it is not the only paper out there to use such tactics in order to get half a story that is subsequently mis-reported.
Unfortunately, it is not the only paper out there to use such tactics in order to get half a story that is subsequently mis-reported.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't agree more. There were (and still are, I am sure) some honest folk around in Fleet Street. On the whole, I found the specialist correspondents (with a background in that speciality) were a good bunch, as were some of the senior correspondents who had been around a while. In addition, personalities change, so I can not speak to the current crop with any degree of knowledge, except to say that some of the really good guys who were at the DM in my time have gone on to other, sometimes greater, things.
But enough of the thread creep ...
But enough of the thread creep ...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
soddim
Add what Gerontocrat posted to what the NOTW has done over the last few years, I think it shows where the majity of the media are at.
"There were (and still are, I am sure) some honest folk around in Fleet Street."
Maybe, but as was shown in your post, even if you are a good egg, your editor may not be so it doesn't matter what you write, they will still change it.
.
Add what Gerontocrat posted to what the NOTW has done over the last few years, I think it shows where the majity of the media are at.
"There were (and still are, I am sure) some honest folk around in Fleet Street."
Maybe, but as was shown in your post, even if you are a good egg, your editor may not be so it doesn't matter what you write, they will still change it.
.
