Friday 28th April 2017

Friday 28th April 2017

Papers Reviewed: The Sun, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Times

The Sunsun.28-04

Topic of article: Terrorism, national security

Headline: KNIFE ONE LADS!

Author(s): Mike Sullivan

Analysis: A man was arrested in Westminster yesterday carrying a bag of knives. The Sun is pulling a fear tactic playing into our society’s concerns over brown men with beards. While very little written content is presented on the front page of the paper today, what is pointed out numerous times is the fact that the suspect had a beard. The sub-headline here specifically uses the word “jihadi” to describe the suspect, while giving no evidence to back this up. The headline itself? Victorious in its exclamation, and joking in its wording. Instead of laughing at a man who was arrested, what about enquiring about the circumstances that lead him to fill a bag with knives and carry them to Westminster?

 

The Guardianguardian.28-04.jpg

Topic of article:  Terrorism, national security

Headline: Police swoop on suspected terrorist near Westminster

Author(s): Vikram Dodd; Rowena Mason

Analysis: A suspect was arrested yesterday near Parliament with a bag full of knives, as of yet his motives are unclear. While the headline and article at first seem to take a stance that this was clearly a foiled act of terrorism, it is only by the end of the first page that the possibility that this suspect was instead suffering from a mental health problem, is presented. What is clear is that details of the suspect, and their motives are still hazy, and tensions are still high following the previous terrorist attack just 5 weeks ago. The Guardian plays into this fear by listing the details of this previous attack- either in an attempt to have enough text in the article to fill up the front page, or to convince us that this was a terrorist attack, before any other details are known. The paper understands that this arrests may have been triggered by a member of the Muslim community, and here all of our prejudices as a society are laid out in the open. If it had been a white man depicted in the adjoining picture (on almost every front page today), would the headline have been the same? It’s a “Them vs Us” approach, even before we know who “Them” is referring to.

Daily Maildaily_mail.28-04

Topic of article: Terrorism, national security

Headline: SEIZED, WITH ‘A RUCKSACK FULL OF KNIVES’

Author(s): Rebecca Camber, Arthur Martin, Christian Gysin

Analysis: A terror suspect was arrested near Downing Street yesterday. The suspect was carrying a bag of knives. The Daily Mail has zoomed into the same picture that all four papers in today’s post include, to show the “smirking” face of the suspect, possibly trying to fearmonger the public at the apparently calm and composed suspect as he was being arrested. There is very little information presented on the front page of this tabloid today. The only additional information provided is the age of tehe man and the fact that he was known to the police services. There were two viewpoints that this news could be looked at here, the first being the current climate of fear of terrorism in the public, especially following last months attacks. The second, which is not seen in the article, is the success of the security intelligence services, and the reassurances that this should give the public. I suppose reassurance does not sell has many papers as fear does.

 

The Timesthe_times.28-04.jpg

Topic of article: Politics, technology, internet, child safety

Headline: Hit internet giants over danger to child safety

Author(s): Sam Coates, Deputy Political Editor; Mark Bridge, Technology correspondent.

Analysis: The NSPCC is calling for stronger regulations over the content displayed on social media, to protect children from “pornography, self harm, bullying, and hatred”. While the headline is a bit bizarre and vague, this here is an interesting read. The Times here almost buries the news of the Digital Economy Bill, passed by Parliament just yesterday (which many point out its focus to be “protecting” children from pornography), in NSPCC’s call to action for a new social media watchdog. On the one hand, we have the huge concerns over sites like Facebook and content streamed on Facebook Live. One the other hand, we have the UK’s on-going concerns over all pornography in general. It is very interesting that these two ideas have been lumped together by The Times. Is it that they are trying to portray pornography to be just as damaging as bullying? It should be pointed out here that the evidence that any exposure to pornography in childhood is in any way damaging is either inconclusive or lacking all together. The NSPCC wants children to be shielded from self-harm on social media, and fails to acknowledge sites such as Netflix and their controversial 13 Reasons Why show (which is a great watch by the way). Yes, companies such as Facebook and Twitter, need to do more to regulate their content. But why is this the same as pornography access on the internet? More information on the Digital Economy Bill can be found on the UK parliament’s website here: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2016-17/digitaleconomy.html . The “Armed terror suspect in Westminster” also makes the front page of The Times today.

 

Front page images from: Kiokso ( http://en.kiosko.net/uk/)

Reviewed by: Anjali Menezes

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s