You are reading a single comment by @h2o and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • There are legal reasons for the language - the guy is alive, in custody, and will face trial. That means the media have to not prejudge guilt. In a worst case, prejudicial coverage could lead to the abandonment of a trial, which would not be good.

    Yes, the downplaying of guilt is problematic when it means people internalise disregard for responsibility, as with the language about RTAs. But it's an attempt by the media to respect the courts.

    And yes, you can probably find examples in the Daily Mail and the Sun etc of disrespect for the courts, but I'm talking about responsible journalists here.

    In any case, the police saying they're dealing with it as a terrorist incident has made it much easier for the media to report it as such, but in quote marks.

About

Avatar for h2o @h2o started