I saw today that most of Lunchtime Live was taken up by the live coverage of Pc Sharon Beshenivsky’s funeral at Bradford Cathedral. Obviously this was a particularly tragic story which shocked the nation, but was it really in propper “taste” for Sky to show the entire funeral on their news channel?
For most people watching, they would have never known her, never met her, and only heard of her becuase of the terrible way she lost her life. Personally I do not think it was in propper taste to show the church service on television, it should have been left to the people who were there: eg family, friends, colleagues, and the people of Bradford who she served. It should not have been used as some sort of television show.
I note bbc News 24 only showed the procession through the streets, but not the service.
Surely the point is that this case is sub judice. Watching a funeral like this on TV (and the same is true of the memorial parade in Liverpool a few months ago) can’t help but influence potential jury members.
I don’t belive Sky decided to leave PMQs – which is vital for a news channel – on Active while they put out the funeral live. Bad judgement.
Therefore there are no ethical issues with screening it. If you don’t like it, switch it off.
Exactly! That’s what free choice is all about these days. There’s more than one news channel and plenty of other general TV channels to watch. So I don’t see what the problem is with it myself. It was a newsworthy event and Sky News decided to cover it live. People may have different views about it, but I don’t think it was unethical.
If it had been a father of multiple children who had been on the job a matter of months the media would have barely raised an eyelid. Another double standard of an hysterical media organisation such as SKY News.
I don’t recall the murder of two Leicestershire Police officers (both with a family) getting similar coverage a few years back, or any outrage from any news organisations that the killer was handed a manslaughter sentence and will more than likely be out in seven years. A sentence I further add, he is appealing against.
SKY News are obsessed with single story coverage. Who cares about how well they can cover something when they should really question their amount of time given to a story (re: the whale, George Best, POL tank explosion. etc etc) and it’s relevence. There is far too much emphasis on ‘breaking news’. Who cares if David Cameron has left his house to vote in a leadership election? Does that kind of crap really warrant breaking into anything? period? The news channels are all trying to outdo each other by reporting on the most pedantic of details before each other regardless of their informational value and relevence :rolleyes: