Derrick Bird and the price of infamy
It's a cruel, cold business, the tragedy-porn industry. One minute it's the self-styled "Crossbow Cannibal" all over the front pages; the next, someone else turns up and dislodges him from the headlines. That someone is Derrick Bird, who has taken 12 human lives, and then his own, in a horrible series of events - each death as tragic as those now-suddenly-forgotten women who fell victim to a serial killer. Reading these tales stitched together by the Guardian, it's discomforting and moving to think of those ordinary days that suddenly turned to tragedy, those people whose hopes and dreams were snuffed out unforseeably, prematurely, and violently.
I can't help wondering where the line is between accurately reflecting the awfulness and unexpectedness of such a grisly sequence of deaths, and lingering a little too long on the bloodiness. Maybe you can see the line being reached, and perhaps crossed, here:
I don't know, call me squeamish or something, but I find it a little unpleasant to see a blood-soaked blanket with a dead human head poking out from underneath. And I feel compelled to ask a question: would such a graphic image be used if there was such a photo available of, say, a soldier, especially a British one? I am not so sure it would, though I could of course be wrong. I don't really know what justifies it in these circumstances. Of course it's an exceptional story but that's a real dead person under that blanket, with a family and friends. Do we really need to see it? Would we not fully understand the tragedy without seeing it?
You may be aware that the Press Complaints Commission includes some ambiguous (of course) mumblings on 'intrusion into grief or shock', and also states:
Relatives or friends of persons convicted or accused of crime should not generally be identified without their consent, unless they are genuinely relevant to the story.
It's with that in mind that I felt a bit uncomfortable reading this.
There's a photo as well, which I needn't repeat here, of Derrick Bird's son indeed looking distraught, as is entirely expected given the circumstances. And it's pretty clear that he didn't want to talk:
Today, Bird's eldest son [snip] appeared in public for the first time since the killings to visit his mother in the tiny village of Lamplugh.
He left without making any comment. Yesterday's tragedy came just two weeks after Mr Bird became a father for the first time. It should have been a time of pride and celebration.
Of course it's not only a tragedy for those relatives of the people who were innocent victims of the shooting, but for Derrick Bird's family too. But clearly they've already had to contend with reporters and photographers at this most traumatic of times. Why do we benefit from seeing a photo of this man? How does that help with anything? He looks like he's grieving - well yes, he would be. Again, like the body sticking out of the bloody blanket, I don't really see what we gain - apart from intruding a little more into a tragedy. (You can see why I never made it as a journalist, can't you? Just haven't got the guts for it.)
There's been a lot of good reporting of an extraordinary and awful event; but a lot of the rest seems to have enjoyed the bloodiness a little too much for this reader's tastes. The big face of the killer staring out of all the newspapers - I can't help wondering if this is just what those people who want to 'go out in a blaze of glory' would like to happen, if it isn't in some way making their grandiose dreams come true. Maybe putting the victims centre stage might be better, though I don't think, for the sake of their families, we need to see their bodies under bloody blankets. We don't learn anything new; we know or can imagine very well what happens to human beings when they get hit by bullets.
And then Derrick Bird will fade away, and the reporters will leave, and stop hassling his family, and the families of those who were gunned down, and it will be all forgotten, or as forgotten as it can be. And then there'll be a new Crossbow Cannibal, or Derrick Bird, and it will all begin again.
Related posts:
Buy my book, it’s great
Switch site
Donate
Recent Posts
- Cheerio, cheerio, cheerio…
- Children died
- The letters you never get around to sending
- Applying again
- I just sent Robin round – 2
Most Commented On
Recent Comments
- Iain on Applying again
- Roger on The letters you never get around to sending
- Dave Hodgkinson on The letters you never get around to sending
- droid on The letters you never get around to sending
- Rogue_Leader on The letters you never get around to sending
About Me
Hello. I'm a Bristol-based writer and soon-to-be-redundant journalist. You can read more about me and the Enemies site here, or follow me on Twitter. Email me if you like - antonvowl at live dot co dot uk
If you're struggling to read the site please use the drop down box below to increase the text size.
June 3rd, 2010 - 13:53
To me, the sun’s is the most worrying, sensationalizing a very real and very tragic event almost to the point where it comes across as a peice of ficiton. THe Headline, the darken background and Bird’s photo possibly the most abnormal one they could come across that with the lives lost almost like a score makes it more akin to a movie poster rather than the tragey it is.
June 4th, 2010 - 07:13
The line between fiction and reality has been blurred for ages. The Mary Whitehouse brigade overreact and want to ban everything because that’s what Jesus wants, while the liberal perspective, against censorship (and i’m on pricniple against censorship), reduces the situation to simplistic nonsense. The outrage against video games is a perfect example, but the effect of 18-rated hyperreal violent games is there – even if it’s more subtle than the latter understand and perhaps less directly dangerous than the former.
The reporting from Cumbria has been clumsy and forced. One interview yesterday morning on radio 4 was a real low where a local GP was compelled to give his experiences of dealing with something like this (something he doesn’ normally experience, obviously). Emotional voyeurism for a generation who seem to need the vicarious experience raised on media storylines.
I think September 97 was the turning point for this new media we have and I hope it changes soon.
June 3rd, 2010 - 14:01
Too true my friend.
Vile. Disrespectful to the victims. Glorifies the murderer.
Tradegy-porn is one of the worst among many dispicable elements of the mainstream British media.
June 3rd, 2010 - 14:08
I have often thought that the rolling 24 hour coverage and the ‘disaster porn’ that surrounds these events is an incentive to commit them.
It’s upsetting. Most of BBC breakfast this morning was dedicated to the Whitehaven incident, and we didn’t learn anything from it. We didn’t gain anything that would better humanity. We just gawped. That’s what we are expected to do, and for the most part people lap it up, and offer the incentive to the next person mad enough to have a go.
I’ve always thought that reporting in situations like this should be limited to
1) it’s happening, so people can make themselves safe.
2) suspect has been identified / call for witnesses
3) person is brought to justice.
No biographies, no ‘from the scene’ reporting. There are loads of people out there dealing with their grief. How exactly does filling the town with reporters and film crews make things any better?
June 3rd, 2010 - 14:09
Some of the comments on the DM story about the son chastise the newspaper for showing pictures if the son & 1 picture seems like a facebook profile picture of the son and his partner which, again, conmenters rightly condem the paper for showing.
June 3rd, 2010 - 14:57
totally agree. there’s a great piece of film that was shown on news wipe a while back about the media coverage of the virginia tech shootings – how the blanket coverage was in fact fulfilling the fantasies of the gunman, he wanted to be a ‘star’, (not the right word but you know what i mean) and in fact, one way to prevent such events is to keep publicity to a minimum, to not have ‘disaster porn.’
if nothing else, its just distasteful. not that you’d expect more from the DM, but ffs. the man’s grieving, he is coming to terms with something quite incomprehensible and horrific. give him space, give him privacy.
when steve wright went to jail for the ipswich murders, kay burley asked his ex girlfriend ‘if you’d had a better sex life, would he have done this?’
that’s what disaster porn does. it disregards everything about decent, normal behaviour in return for some sick kick to serve a pre-decided narrative.
i am so sick of the media! all this speculation, rumour, flash of cameras in grieving faces! what does it achieve? precisely nothing, except distress.
June 3rd, 2010 - 15:08
taken 12 human lives, and then his own
Taken 13 human lives, including his own, shurely?
June 3rd, 2010 - 15:26
Well yes, both. I was separating the murders from the taking his own life. But of course he was a human being too, I wasn’t trying to imply anything like that.
June 3rd, 2010 - 16:12
I never thought you were and I’m probably being needlessly pedantic, but given all the MONSTER and BEAST headlines we’ve got to look forward to I just found the phrasing a bit uncomfortable.
June 3rd, 2010 - 17:54
Quite typically, barely 24 hours after the events, and several weeks before all rel;evant evidence will be collated, the “Mail” are already going down the “Why didn’t the police do more?” route, presumably based on the idea that (1) there were several trained police firearms officers in or around Whitehaven yesterday, and (2) they already knew the *exact* route Mr Bird was travelling, although there seems to be a suggestion in some reports that he changed cars at an unknown location.
This type of incident always brings out the worst in the press.
Mind you, given that every single publicised crime of the last thirteen years, regardless of how bizarre, unpredictable or unprecedented the circumstances, was described within hours by “Mail” readers as the personal responsibility of Haridan Hormone, Gordy McBottler and ZaNULiebore, I was tempted to observe on their boards that spree killings by lone oddballs with guns only seem to happen during Conservative Governments. then I remembered that “Mail” readers and messageboard sages don’t “do” irony.
June 3rd, 2010 - 20:48
Anton: “…The big face of the killer staring out of all the newspapers – I can’t help wondering if this is just what those people who want to ‘go out in a blaze of glory’ would like to happen, if it isn’t in some way making their grandiose dreams come true. Maybe putting the victims centre stage might be better…”
How true. Every time it happens – whether here or in the States (how many high-school massacres have there been?) – it’s the same rubbernecking coverage. I can’t help feeling that if, instead, the media (printed and TV) plastered photos of the victims everywhere, and described their lives and what they were doing that fateful day in more detail, and then almost as an aside happened to mention the murderer’s name, with perhaps a tiny passport-style photo of them, I can’t help the thought that by making the coverage more victim-centred, maybe there might be one would-be mass-murderer in the future who, instead of going out in a blaze of glory before topping himself, just quietly tops himself at home alone instead.
June 4th, 2010 - 08:09
The news coverage of this has disgusted me. It’s ghoulish and unnecessarily bloody. Showing images and video of the bodies in the street is unforgivable. These are real people with families who will see these images and have that as their final memory of their loved ones.
And all this goes against the repeated recommendations on how stories like this should be covered.
Here’s a link to the Newswipe clip that mentioned by sianushka talking about very similar coverage of previous shooting in Germany:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4
June 4th, 2010 - 08:29
You have to wonder if, given that the bulk of the content they produce is fictional, tabloid hacks are capable of spinning their stories in any other mode.
I have to admit that when I saw the Sun’s headline and that photo, I thought it was some kind of NWOBHM reference. And then the line started running through my head to the tune of ‘Borstal Breakout’. Which is, you know, mildly funny in an entirely awful way, and perhaps indicative of how divorced from compassion and empathy this style of journalistic presentation is. My first thought is, “that’s a song lyric” and not “how fucking terrible this is”.
Or maybe I’m just a bit fucked up.
June 4th, 2010 - 10:26
A local interviewed by by a BBC hack this morning made possibly the most sensible comment I’ve yet heard concerning the whole sorry business, which was something along the lines of “no disrespect intended but the best thing for us would be if all you lot buggered off and left us to deal with this on our own terms”.
June 5th, 2010 - 07:18
BBC apparently interviewed some 9yo witnesses to the event yesterday. They also received complaints about this and the interview the day before with the local GP. Good job too, hopefully the jaded and cynical BBC machine will get the message.
July 4th, 2010 - 09:35
Sorry for commenting on an old post, I enjoy your blog immensely but it’s been a while since I read it so I’ve been reading back over the older entries!
It was this bit I wanted to comment on:
“And I feel compelled to ask a question: would such a graphic image be used if there was such a photo available of, say, a soldier, especially a British one? I am not so sure it would, though I could of course be wrong.”
Did you see the “Man Down” cover feature on The Sun a couple of days ago? It included the aforementioned headline in huge letters next to an equally huge, close-up photo of a British soldier who’d apparently just been shot in the face/head. I’m not sure where the photo came from or what the justification for the story was (I saw it as I was walking past the newspaper rack while I was shopping and was in too much of a rush to stop and look), but it seemed rather ghoulish to me.