Why we don’t cover domestic violence in MSM
Am leaving this comment here, which is an email from someone with regard to an interaction where two very valiant male journalists wanted to cover the problem of domestic violence and austerity but could not without a smoking gun and a body. Both were well intentioned, and before they both declared their good intentions I understood what the outcome would be.
That attitude there is why so many stories are only covered when it’s too late. They need the official anointment of a court verdict or coroner’s verdict or political speech before they run anything. We *know* DV is up because statistics show it. We *know* DV services cut because there’s been plenty of research showing it. But we’re not allowed to put two and two together without a dead body and an official report because otherwise we’re being ’emotive’ or ‘hysterical’ – but MSM can freely discuss whether the welfare system led to Mick Philpott’s murders…
The entire MSM is currently railing against state-sanctioned media – the left is railing against the NSA and GCHQ, the right is railing against Leveson. I don’t know why any of them bother because they barely run anything that isn’t sanctioned or validated by an organ of the state.”