Why it was right to screen the horrifying images from Woolwich

THE horrific video images captured from Woolwich last week of a blood-stained madman apparently justifying his actions in killing an innocent soldier demonstrated all too clearly the power of the citizen journalist.

Those pictures, initially broadcast by ITV, was taken by a passer-by. Other footage, both video and stills, have since been splashed across all forms of media; newspapers, television, radio has taken sound bites, along with the web and social media.

One man has now been charged with murder, while another lies in hospital awaiting to be questioned. In the meantime, the Metropolitan Police is appealing for the public to come forward with any material they may have taken on their mobile phones or cameras which might help with the murder investigation.

How technology has moved on. The days when digital cameras costing £3,000 a pop and belonged to a privileged few, have long gone.

Now the film quality of mobile phones is so good that it is of broadcast quality.

At the newspaper, Johnston Press has equipped all its journalists with HTC phones, capable of filming video and which, with a wi-fi Hotspot, can work with your laptop or MoJo (mobile journalist as it is affectionately known). This is the shape of the 2015 journalist.

There was much debate whether it was right to broadcast those graphic images. Why should the media give extremists the platform to express their views? Isn't this going to encourage others to follow suit with equally dramatic outrages?

London Mayor Boris Johnson believes it was wrong to do so, and said he did not consider it a valid argument that if mainstream media did not air the images it would lead to a free-for-all on the internet where they would be broadcast anyway.

Boris is wrong. Those pictures should have been broadcast, albeit with the constraints imposed. The public have a mind of their own and it was heartening to see the measured, tolerant response most people displayed.

The extremists only inflicted more harm on the credibility of their cause. How could you not have broadcast those scenes? It would be like ignoring what happened at the Twin Towers over a decade ago.

What happened in Woolwich brought out the best in people, notably the brave woman who stood up to one of the alleged attackers. She remained unbowed like the majority of the British public. This was not about faith or religion, but it was crazed butchery on the streets of London.

 

I had to listen to the recording twice, and even then I didn't quite understand what golf chief, George O'Grady had said wrong following the row over the perceived racist comments towards Tiger Woods by Spanish golfer, Sergio Garcia.

O'Grady used the word "coloured" in an interview defending Garcia. O'Grady described many of Garcia's friends as being "coloured athletes". This followed Garcia making a "fried chicken" comment about Woods at a dinner earlier last week.

I'm sorry, but I don't get this. I am absolutely anti-racist. We all stand equal irrespective of sex, colour or creed. And thank heavens we have moved on from the dark ages of the Race Riots in the USA 50 years ago and removed some of the barriers which existed in this country when I grew up.

But hold on a second. I honestly don't understand how using the word "coloured" is regarded as racially insensitive. Just think. Are we trying to suffocate our language, dancing to some vested minority's tune?

Any right-thinking person would understand the point O'Grady was making that he did not believe the Spaniard was racist since he has many friends who are not caucasian.

What is wrong with that? However we like it, people are of different ethnic origins, so what's wrong with pointing this out. Are we so ashamed of our own race?

Madness, complete and utter madness.

 

Just as a footnote, I met Michael Fish last week, the BBC weatherman. He's now 69 and will long be remembered for the unfortunate forecast the night before the 1987 storms.

We met at the foot of the South Downs to promote a healthy-living campaign in Eastbourne, which is Michael's hometown.

For the photo call he was wearing a special jumper with weather symbols made by Monsoon which was the only one produced.  I think in his dotage he'd warm to the idea that this jumper became a must-have fashion accessory.

A nice guy and a real gentleman who spent 42 years working for the Met Office, many of those on our TV screens - and notable for one memorable hurricane broadcast.