Editorial language: coverage of the Ray Gosling 'mercy killing'

Something really interesting has been going on in reporting about the Ray Gosling story over the last 24 hours (actually over the last 12).

Not having watched the East Midlands regional news/current affairs programme 'Inside Out' concerned, I only heard about Ray Gosling's confession when it was on the local news headlines after the 10pm national news last night.

There, the story was introduced as 'documentary filmmaker and journalist Ray Gosling has confessed on BBC East Midlands 'Inside Out' that he had killed a man in a mercy killing'. It went on say that he did not identify the man, although a brief extract from the programme broadcast earlier on Monday evening was included in the short East Midlands news bulletin.

When I went to bed a few minutes later, and was listening to the radio, I caught the Radio 4 news (and possibly even the World Service news mentioned the story once I switched over...?) who included the same story in their headlines and news coverage. They introduced the story by describing Gosling as a 'documentary filmmaker and gay rights activist' who had confessed to 'killing his lover who was dying from AIDS'.

None of those other phrases had appeared in the introductory comments to the East Midlands 10.30pm news coverage of the story which had included the Inside Out extract of Gosling talking about his actions....

By this morning, the 7am news was still describing Gosling as a 'gay rights activist' who had confessed to 'killing his lover who was dying from AIDS'. But by 8am, the news had changed the latter phrase to 'a friend who was dying from AIDS'.

By 8.24am, Sarah Montague this morning on Radio 4's Today programme described him as confessing to having 'suffocated his lover' which Gosling quickly clarified in the interview by saying "he wasn't my partner, he was my bit on the side".

Now, here are my thoughts:

1) why did East Midlands news in their coverage of their own programme omit/editorially exclude/forget to mention Gosling's position as a 'gay rights activist' and that the person he had killed was (in any way) emotionally connected to Gosling? Did they feel that Gosling's own words, in the extract included from the 'Inside Out' broadcast, were sufficient to make the context clear?

2) was it even relevant for the national news to mention Gosling's position as a gay rights activist, or that there was some emotional connection to the person who was 'killed' by Gosling?

3) why any change from 'lover' to 'friend'? (so euphemistic!)


I'm not passing judgment on Gosling, or his actions, but the editorial choices of language in this current news cycle have been fascinating to track.

East Midlands coverage of Gosling's confession
Police to investigate Gosling
More on Ray Gosling at his own site

Leaning towards the DVDs as we reach the end of the week

Oh bloody hell: the BBC for all its trailers doesn't seem to know what to do with its own product does it when it can't keep Merlin in the remotely same slot for its first two weeks. Bah.

I'm stockpiling DVDs like fury at the mo - I'm actually probably about a months worth of watching behind on what we currently have and now Cloud has declared a need to see The Sweet Smell of Success again. The backlog grows.

Still, after this week at work - computers being generally bloody useless at every turn - its nice to get home and acquaint myself with my lovely mac again.

And listening to iTunes just makes me so happy.

Right, off to decide whether tomorrow is a decorating day. And have some late food - leek and potato gratin.

Regional TV and Local TV: the impossibility of getting it right on commercial broadcasting

Don't get me wrong: I think it sucks that ITV is intending - with permission - to scale back its regional Public Service Broadcasting obligations. [Of course its a moot point how many people watch the commercial TV equivalent of the various BBC regional broadcast news but still...]

Nevertheless, whilst I sympathise with audiences for being offered increasingly less than local TV news from the commercial companies, there are core problems with ever getting this sort of thing balanced -- especially once cost issues are factored in.

Because for a location population, news is scarcely ever local enough, whilst from a practical and fiscal perspective the very best that can be offered has to be regional. The clue is in the language: the latter is inevitably broader in terms of geography; the former may not be driven by population numbers.*

I still recall the old ATV midlands region - covering everything from Shropshire to Stoke, Oxford to Peterborough, Skegness to Gloucester. Birmingham and Nottingham tended to dominate, but what a woolly nonsense it was to try and cover such an area in one bulletin. Thing is though, that for many people even the current - and generally rather more focused - BBC news regions aren't local enough. I'm not saying that there would be much to fill many bulletins if north Nottinghamshire had its own broadcasts, but there is certainly a temptation - and probably evidence - to believe that audiences there are mentally switched off by what's going on in Lincolnshire or the ends of Leicestershire and Rutland. And East Midlands TV is hardly a massive regional area - geographically or in terms of population.

So poor old Borders and Tyne Tees being lumped together. That's virtually a return to the worst days ATV midlands days, and then some. But in cost terms, it's increasingly a struggle for commercial TV to justify the costs of its public service remits. Solutions to maintain what is currently provided - scarcely great but at least something - will continue to be costly. And in the end ploughing more money in would probably mean indirect public subsidy for commercial profit-making** bodies.

Now where are we hearing that sort of activity at the moment?


*For better or for worse, London is an almost impossible area to cover: as the capital of England many things whose equivalent elsewhere in the country would only have local effects/significance, in London take on national significance in terms of impact -- e.g. tube/local rail network strikes.

** Arguably though the commercial broadcasters are not making any profits at the moment...