Reporting of the Wexford deaths
It’s clear that in the case of the apparent familicide in Wexford, the tabloids, especially, have found it easier to mirror the violence in their headlines than attempt to understand it.
It tends to be the case that when a man kills his family, and then himself, he is seen in a criminal light. Today, The Sun calls him “evil dad” and “deranged”. The Mirror also uses “deranged”. In cases where a mother kills herself and a child or children, the coverage tends to be more forgiving - “tragic mum” headlines, and such like. Mental illness, in the shape of post-natal depression, is often taken into account. But when the case involves men, the coverage is simplified and hyped. The delicacy needed in the reporting of any instance of suicide is jettisoned. They have entered the realm of the unexplainable, so they revert to what they know best: short words in big headlines and lazy adjectives.
I’d imagine they’re also rooting through every dumpster and listening to every rumour to try and give their readers a simple explanation for the events too.
After all you can’t libel the dead so they can say what they want - but rather that analyse the likely complex contributing factors that led to this horrific event they will likely latch onto the suggestion that someone had been unfaithful, that someone had a record of being abusive or that someone had subscribed to a bizarre cult.
Comment by Adam | April 29, 2008 at 1:50 pmUltimately there’s very little newspapers can do in these “human tragedy” stories. They should report the incident without editorialising - then maybe let the weekends see if they can pick something relevant out of it - which lets face it is extremely difficult.
Personally I try to switch off to most human interest stories but those this tragic do make you wonder how the microcosm of the family unit can produce something this horrific.
Comment by Steve K | April 29, 2008 at 2:41 pmAdam & Steve - The truth is that people are curious about why something like this might happen, but a newspaper - be they redtop or not - has to be careful in how it deals with that, and reports it. I know that within the Irish Times there is a very strict set of rules regarding the reporting of suicide, and even in a case like this, which has become so public, we have to tread carefully. The mere reporting of such facts can be dangerous in their own way, so the media can certainly do a lot of damage in these cases. Reporting of suicide has the potential to be a contributory factor in future suicides.
Comment by Shane | April 29, 2008 at 2:48 pmHEGARTY HIGHLIGHTS HORRIFIC HEADLINES
You’re right though - the dad in these cases is often painted as devil-like while a mother engaging in these awful crimes is almost forgiven automatically, at least in the press’s eyes.
Personally, I find it hard to be forgiving when any parent hurts their child. Surely it’s the cruelest of crimes, attacking those that can neither defend themselves nor understand what is happening to them.
Comment by Darren | April 29, 2008 at 3:01 pmNo doubt there’s public curiosity in cases like these, but the newspapers should appease that with facts and nothing more. If they don’t have any facts it’s not their job, or shouldn’t be their job, to simply fill the vacuum anyway.
And as you say, when facts are available they have to be careful in how they handle them too.
Comment by Adam | April 29, 2008 at 3:25 pmThis reflects society’s attitude to men and violence/crime generally. Remember the Scissor Sisters - they were generally treated by the Gardaí, courts and media with a large degree of sympathy. Even though the media was happy to sensationalise the story, elements of the sisters’ disadvantaged background and tough life were dealt with. If a man had carried out the horrific murders they did, I can only imagine the apoplectic fits of hyperbole the media would enjoy.
John Waters (I think) made a similar point recently about handcuffing: women are almost never shown on television being led away handcuffed, even if convicted of a violent crime. On the other hand, men are almost always handcuffed, even when accused of a relatively minor crime (I think he used the example of civil servants making a road traffic offence “go away” where the offender was having a particularly difficult set of personal experiences).
I’m not saying the media treatment of men is always wrong (apart from tabloids at times), but I don’t understand why there’s an immediate rush to sympathy with women.
Should we look at women any differently? I read an article this morning (can’t remember where - Guardian? NY Times?) about Lynndie England et al, which suggested that perhaps women are no different than men, than a war or a world run by women might not be any different and that women have the same capacity (if not a greater capacity) for cruelty, etc.
None of this particularly relevant to terrible current news tragedy, but anyway.
P.S. COMPLETELY UNRELATED TOPIC - would like to commend Shane and the Times for open comment policy - recently noticed new comment facilities on the Independent’s website, but the comments are moderated and the editors remove any direct criticisms of their journalists (even non-controversial ones).
Comment by Bolg | April 29, 2008 at 5:45 pmBolg - Thanks for that. The Lynndie England etc piece was in today’s Irish Times (Features section).
Comment by Shane | April 29, 2008 at 6:23 pmThe deranged dad description in the Mirror was an out and out clanger.
Comment by Green Ink | April 29, 2008 at 6:46 pmLOL closer to home then. Above comment was just an excuse to pretend I have erudite and cosmopolitan reading tastes. In fact: bored at work.
Comment by Bolg | April 29, 2008 at 7:48 pmBolg - if you haven’t already you might want to watch last night’s Questions And Answers - specifically on the issue of statutory rape. John Waters made some very pertinent points about how men are being criminalised when women are not and how the bizarre some politician’s view of things seem to be.
It struck me that he was stating the obvious, but it was an obvious that no politician would dare state because of our society’s tendency to automatically see the woman as the victim and the man as the aggressor.
Comment by Adam | April 29, 2008 at 9:32 pmOne of the stranger aspects to this is the way the Irish examiner focused on the family finances so quickly yesterday and the way this links to the rapid decline in the building sector.
I’ve half a blog post written but I want to be careful about what I’m saying as there is not proof of any connection as yet and there may well be none.
Comment by Dan Sullivan | April 29, 2008 at 9:38 pmShane, maybe you could tell us how these headlines come about. Is it editorial policy? Is it the journalist writing the piece? Is it a ’sub-editor’? Or Is it just a collection of low-lifes who have no grasp of human decency?
Comment by Eskimo | April 29, 2008 at 11:50 pmDan - did you see RTÉ’s report on the Bank of Ireland data security breach? Almost in one breath they went on to say that this wasn’t BOI’s first IT-related problem, and talked about the former chief executive having to resign due to visiting inappropriate sites at work. WTF? With state media like this, who needs tabloids?
Comment by Bolg | April 30, 2008 at 7:16 amEskimo - I don’t know exactly how their newsrooms work, but headlines in general - especially on front pages - are often a collaboration between subs, chief sub and editor.
Comment by Shane | April 30, 2008 at 9:49 amBolg, I saw that and thought it was interesting that they take the view that the two incidents are even remotely comparably.
Man uses work IT resources to research getting some tail in Vegas - Action taken: Fire Him!
People lose details/records of tens of thousands of paying customers - Action taken: shrug shoulders and say well these things can happen. And remind people to cover their hands when entering their PIN number. Security, it’s your problem!
Comment by Dan Sullivan | April 30, 2008 at 10:16 amThe greatest gulf in reporting stance between broadsheet and tabloid is in the headline writing.
Comment by Kid | April 30, 2008 at 10:56 amTo momentarily divert from rape and murder to sport for illustrative purposes, the two types which really get up my bracket are the “Ferguson SLAMS Wenger” type (use of “bust-up” also frequent); and the “Ferguson - I’ll get revenge” type, where any random set of (unuttered) words can be dressed up in quotation style (preferably with a pun on Rooney or Ronaldo’s surname thrown in for good measure).
It then doesn’t matter how mild the actual quotes are in the bodycopy.
The first example is sensationalism; the second outright fictional quoting, something which would appear be in direct conflict to reasonable ethical standards.
Kid, Check out the Guardian’s Style Book (available as a PDF on their website) which discusses this, and urges writers not to use words like SLAM etc in headlines.
Comment by Bolg | April 30, 2008 at 1:01 pmShane - you should check out John Waters’ column in today’s “Irish” Daily Mail On Sunday… perhaps he reads blogs after all.
Comment by Adam | May 4, 2008 at 10:30 am