Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Local Media Censorship

I mentioned about the Ashley Hedger murder in a post 2 weeks ago, because the trial for his murder is under way. The news appeared in the Newham Recorder that week, but was nowhere to be found on their website.

This week, the Newham Recorder features on Page 5, the jury verdict of the equally awful murder of Akeel Akabar . The story is online. Go to their website, and if you search on Akeel Akabar, you will find this story.

In comparison, on Page 3 of this week's paper, there is further news on Ashley Hedger's trial:... "Simon Korzed, 19, told the Old Bailey how he saw three Asian men attacking 16-year-old Barnardo boy Ashley Hedger during a frenzied assault..." This story is NOT online. Search on the Recorder website for Ashley Hedger, and it comes up blank with no stories.

There is some active censorship going on here. Probably under Party Political Influence. The question is, why should some people be allowed to choose what is to be censored? Under whose authority? And isn't it presumptious of them that they think they know what is best for the rest of the country?

And so many people are led to think that in Britain, they live in a Free Country with Free Speech and a Democratic way of Life? Well reality doesn't quite match up to the claim.

No wonder the "Far Right" get so angry.... This censorship only serves to make things worse.


Anonymous said...

Absolutely right. I tried to look up the story and was amazed by its absence.

It was probably under pressure to not "Stir up racial hatred".

IOW censorship.

loveandthecity said...

The reasoning that airing a story might "stir up more racial hatred" is trite and archaic. Truly non-biased news-reporting should report on horrific murders equally, all the time. Even-handed journalistic standards have to be applied to everything.

Cloaking a story only serves to make trouble for the future. The troubles of today were due to the trite solutions that were applied yesterday.