Tuesday 23 September 2008

Proof of political manipulation on news reporting in Tameside

Tameside holds regular meetings with local newspaper editors to gather information and stop sensationalist reporting which might otherwise start or add to rising tensions, e.g. in response to a Kick Racism out of Football campaign, an extremist political group wanted to picket a local football stadium. A local newspaper was going to print the story on its front page – an action that was likely to bring unwanted publicity to the picket and fuel rising community tensions. The intervention of the Community Cohesion Partnership prevented the story from being run and in the event no-one turned out for the picket.

Click this link and go to page 40 to read the original document. This just confirms beyond doubt what I have suspected for a long time. I am now totally convinced that TonyDJ and Co were being absolutely truthful when they sent me little snippets of information regarding incidents of grooming and rape that occurred locally but which was never reported in local newspapers. It is utterly sickening to know how the truth is being distorted to fit in with a political agenda centred on 'community cohesion'. Tameside Citizen

20 comments:

tonydj said...

I always knew that the council pressured and interferred with the press....now we have proof!

Now, lets look at Postal Ballots!

Tameside Eye said...

It would be interesting to see how much this "interference" costs.

Anonymous said...

I can see what your saying TC but you can also read that story the opposite way.

local press fed a false a malicious story that the lunatic right would be picketing an event. local editors ask the council. local council tell the press that the lunatic right constantly make empty threats that they cant / dont carry out. local press decide not to put the issue on the front page. local press proved right because nobody turns up for the said picket. a story that was false but designed to create tension didnt make it to the front page.
Less shocking that way around

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tonydj said...

What the devil have the two posts about the USA got to do with this issue of Tameside? C'mon TC...OUT OUT OUT!!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

IF WE DO NOT ACT NOW AGAINST THE FAR RIGHT IN TAMESIDE THAT MEANS ALL OF US IN THE FIGHT.

Anonymous said...

come on tonydj join the human struggle for one man one vote, we see the world with people moving around the world lets make them all welcome. one race one nation after all tonydj

Anonymous said...

What aboy taking the fight to the far Left as well?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

RE: Anon. What is the difference with this and the front page article of John Taylor's death threats from the fash? Now that got printed.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tonydj said...

QUOTE
Anonymous said...
I can see what your saying TC but you can also read that story the opposite way....UNQUOTE
The local BNP never planned a picket or demo. They never threatened or bluffed that there would be one. My colleagues and I were never approached by the authorities for information.

SO WHO THREATENED AND WHO RECEIVED THE THREATS.

You seem well informed "anon" ?

Tameside Citizen said...

Quote " local press fed a false a malicious story that the lunatic right would be picketing an event. local editors ask the council. local council tell the press that the lunatic right constantly make empty threats that they cant / dont carry out. local press decide not to put the issue on the front page. local press proved right because nobody turns up for the said picket. a story that was false but designed to create tension didnt make it to the front page.
Less shocking that way around" Quote


That is a fair point by anon.

I suppose you could also include other problems that could occur as a result of sensational media reporting. Can anyone remember the outrageous acts of vigilantism perpetrated against totally innocent people when one of Murdoch’s rags started ‘naming and shaming’ alleged sex offenders? Mobs of hundreds would gather and attack properties and people, who after the event was discovered to have been totally and utterly innocent. But I still maintain censorship is still a big no no other than in exceptional circumstances.

tonydj said...

However, the main point about this report is in the opening two lines.

QUOTE Tameside holds regular meetings with local newspaper editors to gather information and stop sensationalist reporting which might otherwise start or add to rising tensions UNQUOTE

"Regular"..."to gather information" ...."to stop sensationalist reporting"

How regular? If it's regular, how often do "sensationaliat" stories occur? And what information is being gathered? On whom? and why?
To STOP sensationalist stories. How? By threatening the journalists? The editor? Loss of income from advertisemets? Or arresting them on trumped up charges and pinching their computer as happened to "Tameside eye"?

What DO those first few lines mean?

Anonymous said...

some very strange conflicting thinking here.

If, as TonyDJ claims, the story is a total fabrication and there were no threats and no plans etc to picket some event, why does he then claim that the existance of this story is proof of some council and press plot. If the story is untrue then there then the proof that Tony claims can not be true either.

If the story is true so are the empty threats of the far right. If thats the case, why would the press seek tdj's opinion as to the credibility of the situation if he is the planner of these bogus threats. This, by defination, he claims to be, as he claims in earlier posts that no threats were issued - a fact(if it is a fact) only the issuer of the threats would know.

If the empty threats are a regular feature, which may well be the case, is it not reasonable for the press to check facts with reliable sources rather than the threat issuers

Anonymous said...

apps

there is a bogus "then there" in the final sentence of the first para

tonydj said...

Oh dear, this is getting complex.

As I said, the main point of interest is that regular meetings are held where information is exchanged and "sensationalist" stories are quashed ie censorship.

Then an example was given of a quashed story. Whatever happened or did not happen A STORY WAS QUASHED.

It matters little to me whether the story was "Football stadium picketed by......." or "Hoax threats to picket anti-racism event made by...." the fact still remains that a story was censored by outside influence.

Just who are the "Community Cohesion Partnership"? Or as they are called now "Cultural & Cohesion Partnership"?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.