Donate SIGN UP

Eu Orders British Press Not To Reveal When Terrorists Are Muslims

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 12:06 Wed 05th Oct 2016 | News
53 Answers
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/717627/free-speech-crackdown-EU-report-British-press-hate-crime-violence-terror

/// Blaming the press, ECRI Chair Christian Ahlund, said: “It is no coincidence that racist violence is on the rise in the UK at the same time as we see worrying examples of intolerance and hate speech in the newspapers, online and even among politicians.” ///

Blimey, has he not yet noticed the rise of racial violence etc, more so in other European countries?

But then it would seem that our press have already been 'got at' when they are reluctant to call it a terrorist attack, with no ISIS involvement, just putting the blame on the mental health of the individual.
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 53rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
This is not a directive, or law or anything with any authority.
It is just a report with some recommendations which Mrs May can and should ignore.
None of what it says will be imposed on us.

Is there a link to the 83 page report anywhere?

If someone commits an act of terrorism we the British Public have a right to know who is attacking us, and now especially after the Referendum, the EU and their dictatorial ideas should be quietly ignored.
I think Muslim terrorist activity is already being played down by the press.
Thank you
We are free to ignore the report......which I trust we will.
It is probably recommendation 8 that the Express does not like. It says the Editors' Code (a toothless bit of self regulation) should be amended to make it easier for people who have been the subject of biased reports, to be able to have their complaint heard.
Even if it is a report it is blatantly wrong, we dont live under a dictatorship.

Oh hang on we do - the EU.

I agree Naomi, without doubt terrorist activities are being played down.
Reading through the 23 recommendations, I cannot isnstantly spot the one that says muslim terrorists' religion cannot be disclosed by newspapers and journalists.

The recommendations are on page 42 in the above link.
Question Author
Mamyalynne

/// Is there a link to the 83 page report anywhere? ///

I don't know if this is the report, but it makes interesting reading.

https://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/Country-by-country/United_Kingdom/GBR-CbC-V-2016-038-ENG.pdf

Page 22... of this report:

ECRI regrets that a way has not been found to establish an independent press
regulator and that, as a result, certain tabloids continue to publish offensive
material.

ECRI urges the media to take stock of the
importance of responsible reporting, not only to avoid perpetuating prejudice and biased information, but also to avoid harm to targeted persons or vulnerable groups. ECRI considers that, in light of the fact that Muslims are increasingly under the spotlight as a result of recent ISIS related terrorist acts around the world, fuelling prejudice against Muslims shows a reckless disregard, not only for the dignity of the great majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom but also for their safety.

In this context, it draws attention to a recent study by Teeside University suggesting that where the media stress the Muslim background of perpetrators of terrorist acts, and devote significant coverage to it, the violent backlash against Muslims is likely to be greater than in cases where the perpetrators motivation is downplayed or rejected in favour of alternative explanations.

ECRI strongly recommends that the authorities find a way to establish an independent press regulator according to the recommendations set out in the Leveson Report. It recommends more rigorous training for journalists to ensure better compliance with ethical standards. It further recommends the authorities to sign and ratify the Additional protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime.

As regards ethical standards, the Editors Code of Practice provides that the press “must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or
disability”

Question Author
Gromit

Got there before me, while I was constructing my post.
Aog screams 'Brits ordered not to specify Muslims....'

and as gromit comments // This is not a directive, or law or anything with any authority. //

and so there is no order - no outrage - no censorship - no nothing

normal day for AB.....
The Editors' Code is an exercise in self regulation.
A body, group, organisation policing itself never works.
AOG - //But then it would seem that our press have already been 'got at' when they are reluctant to call it a terrorist attack, with no ISIS involvement, just putting the blame on the mental health of the individual. //

Maybe we read different media, but the papers I read only advise on the mental condition of a perpetrator, if it is relevant to their actions.

Your post reads as though the press hush up a terrorist's religion, and pop in his mental health status instead, as though the two are mutually exclusive, and the second can be used as an excuse instead of the first.

I do not believe that this is the way terrorism is reported in our media.
next they'll be telling us how bent our bananas should be.
//Maybe we read different media, but the papers I read only advise on the mental condition of a perpetrator, if it is relevant to their actions.//

The headline reporting the stabbing of an American tourist in London very shortly after the incident described the attacker as ‘Norwegian’. It transpired that he was, in fact, Somalian and had lived in Norway only briefly. It was claimed the attack had been triggered by mental health issues, even though between the time of the attack and the release of media reports, insufficient time had passed to make an assessment. His name was withheld and as far as I’m aware it has never been released. I don’t recall reading what became of him. Hmmmm.....
//His name was withheld and as far as I’m aware it has never been released. I don’t recall reading what became of him. Hmmmm..... //

he appeared at the old bailey on 9th august, at which hearing he was named, and this was reported in the guardian. his trial has been set for february next year.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/09/zakaria-bulhan-appears-in-court-over-russell-square-attack
Oh good. Thanks mushroom.
Naomi,
That is not how the Daily Telegraph reported it. The Somalian conne tion was in the headine. The attack was not a terrorism attack, and no terrorism prosecution has followed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/04/woman-killed-and-five-injured-in-suspected-terror-knife-attack-i/

1 to 20 of 53rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Eu Orders British Press Not To Reveal When Terrorists Are Muslims

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.