Reporting of the Death of Ian Tomlinson

(for images follow the link in bibliography to the Wikipedia over view of the case)

On the 1st April 2009, there were large demonstrations in London focussed on the start of the second G20 summit which was to take place the next day. Ian Tomlinson, a newspaper vendor, collapsed and died within the cordon. Initially there were strong official denials that Mr Tomlinson had had contact with the police before he collapsed; with the the Evening Standard featuring a headline “Police [were] pelted with bricks as they help dying man” – a headline juxtaposed with a standard, wide, illustrative demo shot printed over two pages, taken from behind the police line. The picture shows police outnumbered by protesters seeming bracing for further attacks from protesters.

Given what we know about the case now this headline in the Evening Standard eerily echo the reports in The Sun following the tragedy at Hillsborough and is an example of mainstream media backing or following the lead of the establishment version of events. However, unlike the events of Hillsborough some 20 years previously eyewitness reports started to come through that the Evening Standards headline was inaccurate

The Guardian and Observer Newspapers published video and still images which started to come through from the public and other mainstream news agencies who were in the area at the time of Mr Tomlinson’s death. The combination of these images when sequenced together started to point the conclusion that Mr Tomlinson had been struck and pushed by a police officer.

As a result, the police who pushed Tomlinson was identified, tried for manslaughter. Although he was found not guilty, he was dismissed from the police force for gross misconduct.

The evening standard is by reputation is a right-wing/pro-establishment newspaper in a similar vein to the Daily Mail, therefore, its reporting of the incident fits with the general tonality of its editorial content. The Guardian and Observer are a more liberal anti-establishment newspaper and therefore the question of the polices version of events again fits within the totality of the paper.

As we have discussed in an earlier post there are problems with citizen journalism is how unbiased and objective it content is – and given who was publishing these images with are potentially incriminating the police – the Guardian / Observer it would be appropriate to question them.

However, this is what makes this case a little different to a viral blog post it comes from what the BBC’s describes as – “User Generated Content”. It hasn’t been written into a story by the creators just pasted directly to the news channels – in this case, The Guardian and observer for them to filter and process and verify in their normal way. Also, not all the material came from Citizens, while the initial video sent to the Guardian was taken by a US investment banker, in London on business, and the fourth video was taken by an anonymous bystander, the other two videos were taken by a Channel 4 news crew and a freelance journalist.

Although the images were eventually processed through mainstream media validation process they did initially come through alternative sources the US businessman realising he had a picture of injured Mt Tomlinson on his phone as forwarding that on and without these additional user generated images “the truth” surrounding the circumstances would perhaps never come to light.

Barthes said that all photographs unless the manipulated are a record of a moment in time and these pictures appear to completely objective records of the day, as not of the creators had a point of view or prejudice nor the time to pose the photographs. However, there can never be pure objectivity, be in that they are the best image for the article from a series of images – not in this case, here it is prejudice. There is always prejudice any situation and here it is the hands of the newspapers. Is the question would these images had the same treatment had the landed on the desk of The Evening Standard or Daily Mail or The Sun with their projective for pro-establishment rhetoric? Or was because they landed on the desk and liberal left-leaning newspaper with suspicions about the establishment then eventually to the truth.

The truth is always told through a certain point to guide the reader or viewer and is illustrated by the advert from the Guardian in the 80’s while the advert illustrates very valid argument remember just because they have said it doesn’t mean they practice it.

Bibliography

Web.archive.org. (2009). Wayback Machine. [online] Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20110719071853/http://www.chickyog.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/esp67-02042009.pdf [Accessed 16 Jan. 2018].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson

Gibson, O. (2004). What the Sun said 15 years ago. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/jul/07/pressandpublishing.football1 [Accessed 16 Jan. 2018].

YouTube. (2012). The Guardian’s 1986 ‘Points of view’ advert. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SsccRkLLzU&feature=youtu.be [Accessed 16 Jan. 2018].