You are reading a single comment by @salmonchild and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
It is gossip and largely of no value. The piece you link talks about instances where the bereaved have had something to say, I don't think that matches to mass impact events like this.
Look at the case that started this conversation- guy's brother was at concert, hasn't heard from him. What could possibly useful to hear from him? Does his concern/anxiety/confusion really need to be confirmed by a journalist? What value is being added?
Journalists seem to think they are in an exulted position performing some kind of public service- no they are content relayers for large corporate machines, many of them heavily biased and under dodgy control.
salmonchild
It's not gossip, it's the reporter trying to get their facts right and offering the family a chance to give their comment. That is part of balanced reporting - getting comments from all sides.
The Editor of the Press Gazette has written something about this today:
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/why-death-knocks-are-a-difficult-but-essential-part-of-the-job-for-journalists/