There. I’ve said it. I’m disappointed by The Times. It’s their coverage recent murder of the British army soldier in Woolwich that’s getting me upset. I mean I know it’s news, and so has to be reported, but does the newspaper have to publish a video the murderer’s explanation while he’s standing there with his hands covered in his victim’s blood? Did ITV? Did anyone? And yet The Times, a newspaper that prides itself on its investigative journalism did just that.
Can someone explain to me why that’s acceptable? Or right? Report the facts. Have the video as evidence to support your reports, but no one, I repeat no one, should have been allowed to see that video, unless they had do. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Don’t do something, just because you can.
Jim Bowen's Blog 
Leave a Reply