The presence of racist thugs parading through the streets of England this summer smashing mosques, setting police cars on fire, and seemingly wanting to hurt – if not kill – asylum seekers has shocked most of the country. Many were horrified that the memory of three murdered little girls in Southport, and the attempted murder of ten others, could be abused in such a sinister way. It shows a Britain deeply divided, with a muscular minority seeking to stir up hatred of anyone deemed to be “the other”. Legitimate concerns about immigration have been hijacked by those with ulterior motives.
Yet the violence wasn’t just directed at perceived outsiders. As well as injuring more than a hundred police officers, the unrest led to journalists being verbally threatened and sometimes physically assaulted. Police in Northern Ireland are investigating an incident in which a reporter’s phone was knocked from her hand while covering riots in Belfast. A photographer in the city was, according to the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), “attacked by a crowd of masked men, who damaged [his] car and tried to enter it”. Two photographers spoke to the Guardian about the violence, one of whom was assaulted by members of the far right in Middlesbrough, the other by those protesting against the far right in Bolton. These aren’t isolated incidents. The NUJ says several of its members have been abused, attacked and had equipment destroyed or stolen during the recent unrest.
Underlying these attacks is something many journalists have been aware of for some time: a growing, false narrative that the so-called mainstream media (MSM) is lying to the public and somehow colluding with the state to censor or conceal the truth. This is a dangerous attitude. Some journalists are rightfully worried. “That whole term – MSM – is used as a term of abuse,” Duncan Gardham, who has been a journalist for more than 20 years, told me. Reflecting on a career writing about extremism and the threat from Islamists and the far right – he has been assaulted by individuals from both – he said: “The level of anger, and sometimes violence, towards journalists has definitely gone up.”
Another reporter, with more than a decade’s experience of reporting in the UK, agreed with Gardham. “As far as I can see, the methods [used] are that you publicly intimidate journalists who you don’t like [because of] what they’re writing or broadcasting… and that necessarily has the effect of making reporters back off a bit.” Speaking on condition of anonymity because of previous threats, the reporter said this tactic is being weaponised to “seize control of the narrative”. “You attack the mainstream media, say that all they print is lies. You focus your attention on particular journalists, who are doing in-depth work, to try and scare them away. And then, if you’re successful, there’s a vacuum which you can just fill online with your own narrative.”
The tactic can result in self-censorship. “There are better things to do than cover a story in which you’re going to get a load of grief over,” the reporter conceded. Those who shout the loudest and are the most intimidating often win. “We’ve got to get better at countering this narrative online that the MSM are lying bastards,” Gardham told me. “We’ve got to claw [trust] back because otherwise we become part of the enemy.”
That won’t be easy. Gardham believes that responsibility rests with many: the courts, the police, politicians and journalists themselves, who must provide a decent standard of reporting. “Southport is a perfect example of the state doing itself absolutely no favours at all,” he said, explaining that the police haven’t provided information on what they think the motives for the attack were. “It isn’t good enough to ask people not to speculate and then not tell them anything.” All involved need to be better storytellers.
Contempt of court rules mean that information can’t be placed into the public domain that could later prejudice a criminal trial. However some question not just whether current legislation is being properly applied, but whether it works at all in a social media age. Gardham believes that the police sometimes use the law as an excuse. “I’ve spent 20 years in court: [providing some explanation] is not going to cause a trial to collapse. But into that [information] vacuum doesn’t just flood misinformation, but also mistrust,” he explained. People then begin to think, “‘They’re not telling us the truth. They’re not telling us anything. Why aren’t they telling us something? They’re hiding something.’ And we’ve just got to get better at this stuff.”
While others agree on the problem, they’re not so sure of the solution. (They also point out that in cases where the alleged perpetrator is under 18, it’s difficult to explain the story as minors are protected under the law. For any information to be provided by the police at all, even limited as it was to a name in the case of the Southport stabbings, is almost unheard of.) “Why does telling the truth help when people’s instant reaction is going to be, ‘you’re lying to us’?” asked the veteran UK reporter, speaking anonymously. Social media must be subject to more stringent regulation, they say, just as other parts of the media are expected to follow certain standards. But, ultimately, journalists must provide the solution. “I see that the only tonic to all of this is just consistent reporting that is accurate and can’t be questioned; so not straying into wild commentary, inflammatory stuff, but just to report the facts that are incontrovertible.”
It is precisely this kind of reporting – thoughtful, nuanced, explanatory and fact-based – that is under attack. So much so that the NUJ has issued four statements this month calling for journalists to be protected from harassment and violence. On Friday 9 August, the union warned both the police and the government not to try to exploit journalists as “investigative shortcuts” by demanding they hand over images or footage of rioting. Such demands are an “affront to media freedom and puts [journalists’] safety at risk”, Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ general secretary, argued. They also fuel the rhetoric of “those on the far right peddling lies about the motivation of media workers and making threats against journalists”.
At a time when misinformation and disinformation are rife, it has never been more important to have a free press that covers facts without fear or favour. And journalists need others’ help in supporting them to do so. They will make mistakes. They’re human. But a democracy cannot function properly when its citizens believe that its journalists are lying to them and covering up the misdemeanours of the state. As the International Federation of Journalists has argued: “Those who attack journalists are attacking democracy, and undermining everyone’s right to know.”
[See more: England in pieces]
Content from our partners
Related
