Do the mainstream media have a duty to report crime responsibly? According to IPSO’s Code of Practice, they do. However, more often than not, they fail to follow this to the letter.
At the height of the search for Peter Sutcliffe, the front page of every newspaper was dominated with “Yorkshire Ripper strikes again,” “Help us stop The Ripper”. During the Shipman trial, they were splashed with “Dr Death”. Beverly Allitt was dubbed the “The Angel of Death”. Robert Maudsley’s name has long been forgotten by most and replaced with “Hannibal the Cannibal”. These nicknames all have one thing in common. They were given out to these criminals, not by the police, and not by themselves, but by the British press, to sell newspapers. They were splashed all over the front page, instilling fear and panic, yet also a gruesome fascination, in the readers.
Headlines solely meant to attract readers, not to inform
How often do you see “Monster Mansion,” when referencing HMP Wakefield? In the wake of the November 2015 Paris Attacks, The Sun led with a front-page headline of, “1 in 5 British Muslims support Jihadists”. Islamophobic hate crimes and attacks went up as a result of this kind of irresponsible headline. It was later found to be misleading and false.
These headlines are inflammatory and detract from the victims. Not only that but simply put Peter Sutcliffe, Beverly Allitt and Harold Shipman were not some sort of alien species they were and are common criminals no different to any other criminal who commits similar crimes so what about them grabs the press’ attention? Perhaps I have done a disservice by focusing on serial killers; after all, their crimes are somewhat more unique than your average murderer.
“The Twilight Killers,” is another example of these sensationalised nicknames. Was their crime horrific? Absolutely it was. Was it unique? Not exactly. How about “The Minstead Rapist,” also known as, “The Night Stalker?” Yet another criminal whose name has long been forgotten. This shock and awe tactic, mainly adopted by the tabloid press, is employed to draw an audience’s attention from a distance, sell newspapers by the stack load, generate clicks on social media, and is often exaggerated and has been on occasion loose with the truth. These kind of headlines often cause widespread hysteria, suspicion, and has, on more than one occasion, led to wrongful accusations/arrest or a rise in crime against those believed incorrectly to be at fault.
We remember the perpetrators, not the names of the victims
Ask yourself, how many of Peter Sutcliffe’s victims can you name? Can you name a single victim of Harold Shipman or Beverly Allit? The answer, invariably, is no, not without referring to Google.
All too often, this sensationalism boosts the so-called status of the offender, giving them a voice and the often much-wanted coverage they desire. It violates the victims and their loved ones, over and over again. What does it say of us as a society when we put the perpetrator of such abhorrent crimes above the victim/survivor of these crimes?
When Joanna Yeates went missing, her landlord, Christopher Jefferies, was hounded by the press for weeks, and wrongfully arrested. His face was plastered all over the tabloids. His entire life was dredged up and splashed all over the front pages. Every single disagreement he had ever had was used as a headline. The usual, “He seemed like the type,” came crawling out of the woodwork for their quick buck, and their five minutes of fame.
The press had their pound of flesh – they chewed it up, and they spat it out. Quick as a flash, they moved on. After the real culprit was arrested, Christopher Jefferies’ entire life was left in ruins. He sued eight publications for libel and won, (rightfully so), but his life was never the same again. People had turned on him, and even though he was innocent, he couldn’t trust these people again; his friends had sold their connection to him.
Even two newspapers, The Sun and The Mirror, seemingly so greedy for money and headlines, broke reporting restrictions to sensationalise the crime and were found in contempt of court for prejudicing a trial, an act that could have led to a mistrial and the culprit getting away with his crime. Joanna Yeates’ family’s heartbreak was dragged out, their pain and anguish used by a hungry blood thirsty media, their justice delayed, and Christopher Jeffries got a small apology, printed somewhere towards the back of the newspapers he had sued, on one of the pages that few people read.
It’s not only serial killers and serial rapists the press does this to. They also elevated The Krays, The Richardsons, The Essex Boys… the list is endless. To the media, these criminals seem to be heroes, and are constantly glamourised for greed and profit.
Newspapers settle libel suits and meanwhile increase their readership
Fundamentally, there is a serious flaw in the standards to which newspapers are held. While, if something is incorrectly printed, a person is able to sue for libel, this does nothing to deter the press, as they simply pay off the settlement negotiated by high paid lawyers, pop their two-line retraction somewhere around page 80, and move on.
In the case of Christopher Jefferies, while he was arrested, he was never charged. Perhaps we should assure anonymity until a charge is brought against a person? It strikes me that the “innocent until proven guilty,” has been largely forgotten, instead replaced with trial by media. What is becoming increasingly apparent is we need more editorial guidelines and we need stricter rules that govern the press.
Freedom of the press should not mean freedom to sensationalise crime over truth
I am all for freedom of expression and freedom of the press so please don’t think I am advocating for taking that away but given the press are in a position of trust and power with the public they need more of an incentive to report the facts responsibly rather than make up shock headlines for profit. Perhaps if they faced stronger repercussions, it would deter them. Maybe for the repeat offenders, if found guilty of contempt of court they should face a sentence rather than just a fine. Probably the most high-profile case of a newspaper breaking the law repeatedly would be that of The News International Hacking Scandal that saw the group not only hack several high-profile people but they hacked the mobile phone of Milly Dowler who was missing at the time. They listened to her voicemails, they interfered with an investigation, giving false hope to the family that their daughter, sister, loved one was still alive.
This led the police to believe that Milly had simply runaway, rather than what it actually turned out to be – the tragic murder of a young girl. Yet again, they delayed justice. They delayed an investigation. What they did was a criminal offence, and yet not a single person found guilty of this faced any time in prison. Instead, they gave the family some compensation, and off they went, into the ether. The hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone ultimately led to the shutting down of the News of the World however of those charged very few faced any repercussions. Does this sit right with you?
It certainly doesn’t sit right with me.
For the victims, for the families of those they left behind, and for the survivors, we can – and we must – do better.
Bylines Network & No One Above
Where is justice? Survivors voices in parliament
NOA and Bylines Network are collaborating to make sure those voices are heard by the decision-makers who can remove the roadblocks to justice and address systemic failures of accountability.
Your support will allow us to put Gazettes in the hands of all MPs and make the campaign visible around parliament.
