Readers under fire

In light of Robert Needham's allegations is the Queensland Police Union really the most independent and unbiased source available to confirm (or deny) police conduct issues?

The police minister Neil Roberts issued a lengthy and frank response but the uncharacteristic QPS stance ironically doesn't feature largely at all in the story, despite it in itself being particularly newsworthy, simply by its occurrence.

It is a source of conjecture, in view of the absence in the story of the minister's comment and the prominence of the police union's derision about the report, that one of those parties strongly implicated in the Fitzgerald Inquiry - exposed by interstate investigative journalists for complicity and collusion, was (drumroll please) the Qld mainstream media, but surprisingly that's not disclosed in the story.

Compare the original spin to the content:
CMC
Minister for Police

 Several issues in Perth media arose today in relation to story and source choices. The photo of Adrian Watson on the cover of The Werst today and the expose written with Athanae Lucev about beggars on Perth streets, was insensitive to issues of homelessness and poverty to a point of being misguided. Though such stories are usually well intended, albeit ambitious, the lack of sensitivity and insight demonstrated in it is where the guidance of senior and editorial staff is meant to come into the equation, to guide the way difficult stories and investigations are structured.



Posing as two beggars on the streets of Perth may be ground-breaking territory for both The West and these two young reporters but lacked a basic respect for people in that very difficult position and the need to declare oneself a reporter at the commencement of any work-related interaction with the public, let alone taking money from them under false pretences. The stunt also really justifies the public's mistrust of journalists, who in this case could well be perceived as having used the public's charity and betrayed their vulnerability.


Perhaps it may have been a better choice for the two young journalists to get off their mainstream media pedestal(the same pedestal guilty of isolating many journos from their communities) and actually speak to homeless people instead and simply cover the story at a grass-roots level. How about giving a voice to the disadvantaged - that's pretty ground-breaking, too?




That story was closely rivalled by Kate Campbell's article about the burning of Warburton man Ronald Mitchell, while he was being arrested by WA police. Mr Mitchell, 36, was burnt while allegedly holding a vessel containing petrol with those present asserting that this may have occurred as a result of being tasered by arresting officers. The incident follows hot on the heels of the heatstroke death of Warburton elder Mr Ward but no questions about the 'justice' culture in the town have been explored in the mainstream media this week.

Campbell quoted Mitchell's stepfather, but also reported that an 18 y/o woman was charged with assaulting an officer - which might be understandable given she had just seen the police both taser and possibly set a man alight - and reporting that immediately after giving WAPOL's own angle on things, that depicted Mr Mitchell as a violent man also undermined the neutrality of Campbell's reporting. Does an editorial bias exist at The West? It is often the case that WAPOL publicity releases are treated as fact by busy staffers even though the facts have not yet been established in court.

The same publicity angle is also often used by justice agencies of the government to present information relating to custodial deaths. It could be speculated, by media and public alike, that in such instances perhaps the government might be presenting information in the least damaging light in the face of court proceedings against officers involved. But while journos may be aware of this, and why they cannot interview the individual officers involved, they should not assume the public does as well. They need to explain why the only individual detailed in such reports is the accused(presumed innocent), but not those individuals who have been involved in the alleged arrest gone wrong. It is notable that in Mr Ward's case the private sector employer distanced itself from the actions of individual officers after a coronial investigation.

In the overall absence of a reporting climate that allows for fair and balanced reporting, perhaps balance is still available to the public in the publication of two extremes in point of view. David Penberthy, presents the other side of the coin in the discussion of the issues raised in the burning of Ronald Mitchell, who will no doubt be in care at the Burns Unit for some time yet.