Jump to content

To Name Or Not To Name?


Recommended Posts

I see on Energy FM's report about a recent Motorcyclists death that they state:

 

"Police say they're not releasing the identity of the man until formal identification has been carried out."

 

They then proceed to name the man in the next sentence:

 

"However, he's been named locally as..."

 

What's the protocol here? Shouldn't they just wait until officially announced?

 

http://energyfm.net/cms/news_story_143545.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad form I think. If the police say they are not releasing the name for a good reason, then IMO the newspaper should follow suit and not release it. Not releasing a name usually means not everyone close has been informed yet and might be away and difficult to contact etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the Police not LOCAL ???. The persons family may not be on the island and it could have been someone else riding the persons bike.. no way should names be released until family etc have been told and poor fella been formally identified, very sad :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the Police not LOCAL ???. The persons family may not be on the island and it could have been someone else riding the persons bike.. no way should names be released until family etc have been told and poor fella been formally identified, very sad :(

 

The report says next of kin have been informed so I see no problem provided that they are confident the right person has been named and I presume they are. The formally identifying may as itsounds only be a formality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The identity of the man was well known and circulating through word of mouth before the radio stations got hold of the story. The family definately knew before I did (as I saw via Facebook), and I knew way before energy released anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A very sad story and of corse thoughts are with friends and family.

With regards to name or not to name, the name of the chap was all over Facebook and Twitter a while before Energy FM released it. Energy FM were 100% sure it was right. They didnt release any info before the next of kin had been told, they did no wrong. It was already in the public domain.

Things have to change im afraid in this day and age with Twitter and Facebook.

People tend to know news before its on the news.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"However, he's been named locally as..."

 

What's the protocol here? Shouldn't they just wait until officially announced?

 

Happens all the time in the UK press. Latest one being the taxi driver charged with murdering the girl in Swindon, although he was obviously arrested rather than dead.

 

I don't think there's any law stopping anyone (press included) from telling other people about such things. They don't have to wait for the police's say so. "Named locally" gives them a get out clause if they get it wrong - they can blame the person who told them. It's just not acceptable for anyone (press included) to announce it before the family are informed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With accidents, I think the media should wait until the police have done their job. Gossip, Facebook etc. will no doubt continue to do what they do, but I know from the experience of a friend that the police do their job very well and very compassionately in these circumstances, and it would be terrible to learn of the death of a loved one through the media.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With accidents, I think the media should wait until the police have done their job. Gossip, Facebook etc. will no doubt continue to do what they do, but I know from the experience of a friend that the police do their job very well and very compassionately in these circumstances, and it would be terrible to learn of the death of a loved one through the media.

 

Confused of Douglas here.

 

Are we saying it's okay for bereaved families to learn of the death of a loved one from Facebook or this Forum, but not from mainstream media?

Link to post
Share on other sites

chances are the news report was prepared for airing first thing this morning and like all things on island it took them ages to catch upto the fact that the necessary folks had received the unfortunate news. you then end up with an hours old report going out with a recent update to contradict it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read it as it's impossible to control the gossip on Facebook & Forums but far easier to put guidelines in place for Radio stations.... So no, not OK, just uncontrollable.

So, the thinking is legitimate media should be subject to state censorship and told when and how they can report facts of certain incidents. What a healthy precedent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read it as it's impossible to control the gossip on Facebook & Forums but far easier to put guidelines in place for Radio stations.... So no, not OK, just uncontrollable.

So, the thinking is legitimate media should be subject to state censorship and told when and how they can report facts of certain incidents. What a healthy precedent.

 

 

He's right about the guidelines, which they have to observe and impose niceties not imposed on the social networking sites and places like this, which then puts radio news in between a rock and a hard place. Do they name the person as the Facebook paages are doing and risk getting into trouble, or do they follow the guidelines and wait for their audience to complain because they aren't quickly reporting news which is widespread elsewhere?

 

What they seem to be doing is sidestepping the issue by reporting that the person's name has been reported as X on facebook (or 'locally' in this case), so they're still behind the breaking news but not too far.

 

What happens then is that Facebook etc becomes the de facto source of news but without any of the checks and balances which ensure fair and accurate reporting on radio, tv and print.

 

So we all have to remember that not everything on the internet is true, even on Facebook, or in this Forum...

 

Edited to make a bit more sense. I hope...

Edited by jonnyrotten
Link to post
Share on other sites

I read it as it's impossible to control the gossip on Facebook & Forums but far easier to put guidelines in place for Radio stations.... So no, not OK, just uncontrollable.

So, the thinking is legitimate media should be subject to state censorship and told when and how they can report facts of certain incidents. What a healthy precedent.

 

 

I'm only conveying how I think Guzzi meant his post to come across, I'm not saying it's right or wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...