Originally posted by GUT
View Post
In your first example you offered an instance where one? newspaper got it wrong, I assume. This demonstrates why collating a variety of press coverage of the same case (trial/inquest,etc.) is essential to help overcome mistakes of this kind.
- (2) Certainly in the 19th century any statements to the press are invariably identical if they appear in a variety of newspapers in the same edition (morning, afternoon, or evening). So any mistake is also repeated, suggesting the witness was interviewed by an agency journalist, not a single newspaper reporter.
- (3) In the W. M. cases most press opinion on the direction of a case is worded to look like their source was official without actually saying so. Most examples I see tend to avoid using 'fact', they just rely on assertive wording.
The verbatim coverage of criminal cases is rare in my neck of the woods. I honestly can't say I have ever read one. We might see selective quotes, but nothing more. We never see any inquest coverage either.
Comment