This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/26/guardian-coverage-of-woolwich-murder

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The readers' editor on… the Guardian's coverage of the Woolwich murder The readers' editor on… the Guardian's coverage of the Woolwich murder
(4 months later)
It was meant to be a bloody act of propaganda, and in that regard the act of killing a 25-year-old British soldier in Woolwich with knives and a cleaver was tragically successful. Most front pages and newspaper websites carried the truly astonishing image of a man whose hands were covered in blood, delivering a jihadist message to a smartphone held by a witness shortly after the killing on 22 May.It was meant to be a bloody act of propaganda, and in that regard the act of killing a 25-year-old British soldier in Woolwich with knives and a cleaver was tragically successful. Most front pages and newspaper websites carried the truly astonishing image of a man whose hands were covered in blood, delivering a jihadist message to a smartphone held by a witness shortly after the killing on 22 May.
Within hours the video took the message from the streets and into people's homes. The Guardian the following day gave almost three-quarters of its front page to that man, overlaying the masthead into the picture and quoting him: "You people will never be safe."Within hours the video took the message from the streets and into people's homes. The Guardian the following day gave almost three-quarters of its front page to that man, overlaying the masthead into the picture and quoting him: "You people will never be safe."
Nearly every national newspaper carried the image on its front page but it was the Guardian that faced most criticism for its front-page presentation. Social media and bloggers kicked off the debate within hours of publication, not just among readers but among journalists too. Suzanne Moore, a Guardian columnist, tweeted: "The oxygen of publicity … look at tomorrow's front pages. Exactly why they did it. Harrowing for victim's family too."Nearly every national newspaper carried the image on its front page but it was the Guardian that faced most criticism for its front-page presentation. Social media and bloggers kicked off the debate within hours of publication, not just among readers but among journalists too. Suzanne Moore, a Guardian columnist, tweeted: "The oxygen of publicity … look at tomorrow's front pages. Exactly why they did it. Harrowing for victim's family too."
As I write, the readers' editor's office has received around 40 emails about the newspaper's front page and the decision to host the video – obtained by ITV – on the Guardian's website, which showed one of the men deliver the jihadist message minutes after the killing. I also asked staff at the Guardian what they thought about the story, which at one point involved 19 reporters and specialists.As I write, the readers' editor's office has received around 40 emails about the newspaper's front page and the decision to host the video – obtained by ITV – on the Guardian's website, which showed one of the men deliver the jihadist message minutes after the killing. I also asked staff at the Guardian what they thought about the story, which at one point involved 19 reporters and specialists.
Some readers thought the video too graphic to be viewed on the Guardian's website. Criticism of the newspaper turned on complaints that the coverage was too sensationalist and aped a tabloid approach. This is one reader: "I have been buying the Guardian for more years than I can remember, confident that it will always provide thoughtful reporting and an equally thoughtful selection of photographs and images to accompany news items. A written summary of this graphic footage that many TV companies and many of your rivals chose to carry would have been a far more measured and dignified way in which to report this appalling event."Some readers thought the video too graphic to be viewed on the Guardian's website. Criticism of the newspaper turned on complaints that the coverage was too sensationalist and aped a tabloid approach. This is one reader: "I have been buying the Guardian for more years than I can remember, confident that it will always provide thoughtful reporting and an equally thoughtful selection of photographs and images to accompany news items. A written summary of this graphic footage that many TV companies and many of your rivals chose to carry would have been a far more measured and dignified way in which to report this appalling event."
Over at the New Statesman website, Sunder Katwala, a director of Future, a thinktank which focuses on issues of identity and integration, wrote an article also critical of the coverage by some British newspapers but singling out this paper: "Perhaps surprisingly, it is the Guardian's front page which comes uncomfortably close to being the poster front which the murderer might have designed for himself."Over at the New Statesman website, Sunder Katwala, a director of Future, a thinktank which focuses on issues of identity and integration, wrote an article also critical of the coverage by some British newspapers but singling out this paper: "Perhaps surprisingly, it is the Guardian's front page which comes uncomfortably close to being the poster front which the murderer might have designed for himself."
Alan Rusbridger, editor-in-chief, said the front page of the newspaper was shocking because the event itself was truly shocking: "This was an extraordinary, perhaps unprecedented, event. In broad daylight on a British street a man was hacked to death allegedly by someone who then essentially gave a press conference, using Islamist justifications. It was, by any standards, a unique news picture – but in a new media context in which the killer's message had already been distributed around the world virtually in real time."Alan Rusbridger, editor-in-chief, said the front page of the newspaper was shocking because the event itself was truly shocking: "This was an extraordinary, perhaps unprecedented, event. In broad daylight on a British street a man was hacked to death allegedly by someone who then essentially gave a press conference, using Islamist justifications. It was, by any standards, a unique news picture – but in a new media context in which the killer's message had already been distributed around the world virtually in real time."
Some readers and reporters were concerned that the front page amplified the message and would encourage Islamophobia. In all around 60 members of staff responded to an email from the readers' editor asking for views. About a third thought the presentation was right. "There was no alternative," one said. Others were concerned about the quote rather than the use of the image. One emailed: "As someone with very religious Muslim family members in this country I watch press coverage of events like these closely, and often with a fair amount of fear. My mum, though she is one of the 'you people' in Thursday's headline, lives in fear that she will become one of the 'you people' of the EDL's chants. I don't think our front page did enough to show that the Guardian was also there on the page, that anyone else was there other than this man."Some readers and reporters were concerned that the front page amplified the message and would encourage Islamophobia. In all around 60 members of staff responded to an email from the readers' editor asking for views. About a third thought the presentation was right. "There was no alternative," one said. Others were concerned about the quote rather than the use of the image. One emailed: "As someone with very religious Muslim family members in this country I watch press coverage of events like these closely, and often with a fair amount of fear. My mum, though she is one of the 'you people' in Thursday's headline, lives in fear that she will become one of the 'you people' of the EDL's chants. I don't think our front page did enough to show that the Guardian was also there on the page, that anyone else was there other than this man."
I understand and agree with the point. It was right to use the picture and the video, as both were crucial to an understanding of the event. It's not the first time shocking images have been run on the front page. However, the effect of the quote embedded in the photograph meant the message was unmediated.I understand and agree with the point. It was right to use the picture and the video, as both were crucial to an understanding of the event. It's not the first time shocking images have been run on the front page. However, the effect of the quote embedded in the photograph meant the message was unmediated.
• For legal reasons, this article will not be open to comments.• For legal reasons, this article will not be open to comments.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.