to be so angry at the way the Barlow's tragedy has been plastered over the front pages?

[OlivesTorchStreak]

Apologies if this has already come up, but I hadn't seen any threads so thought I would post.

I just think it is so incredibly insensitive and it really pisses me off that the papers are making money out of such a sad, personal and tragic event for this lovely family.

You can just imagine the scene where poor GB leaves his wife's side in hospital to re-fuel with a couple of chocolate bars from the local newstand.... horrible.

Can we use the power of Mumsnet to start a campaign to get people to stop buying papers with such cruel, hurtful and insensitive headlines slapped over their front pages?

I clearly remember the same thing happening to Annie Lennox almost 25 years ago now and that was all over the front pages - I didn't even know she was pregnant. The difference is GB and his wife announced it via Twitter that she was pregnant so people would naturally be asking questions. It's very sad

Thanks nightowl that is the one that I was mainly thinking of. I couldn't be sure if I had remembered correctly and didn't want to get it wrong.

I think that's what it said, not %100 sure!

100% even, that's not money, doh!

Agree with mrsrvc our 2 nd trimester mc rate is also high. It's such an awful tragedy

Smells and Robot But how could the not announce they were having a baby? I'm sure people would have noticed.
People i've never announced my pregnancy to, know i'm pregnant as it's obvious. It's not like announcing it before the 12 week scan.

Very sad news but everything i've read has been sympathetic (apart from the original BBC story that only mentioned Gary and not his wife [angry)

I don't know. I think that a headline like that at least makes it clear that a baby has died. I know that sounds so blooming obvious but a lot of the language people tend to use is geared at almost obliterating the little life. We talk about people 'losing' the baby or the baby being stillborn (which I know is the medical term) and it all contributes to the feeling some parents suffer - that the rest of the world moves on all too quickly. At least a headline which describes them as mourning parents marks the scale of this loss.
I have a friend who lost a dd at around 20 weeks. of pregnancy. When she was expecting her next child I heard a mutual acquaintaince saying how nice it would be if X finally had a girl. Her first two children were sons then the little girl who died. I just had to walk away because I couldnt really believe it. My friends had had a girl and we all knew her name - but it was like she had never been.

Sadly, I think it helps raise much needed awareness that it happens and he did announce it on twitter so I think the press are ok to report it. The article I read was quite sensitive (at least I didn't notice it being insensitive) and discussed the work of SANDS charity.

I think it is understandable that it has been publicised, although it must be very difficult for them to have it plastered all over the papers. I am sure they are media-savvy enough to realise that this was inevitable.

What I do find a bit ghoulish is all the other celebrities tweeting about how sad they are for the Barlows. Surely a private message is more appropriate? Tweeting about it just feels a bit as though they are seeking attention for themselves.

The worst thing ive seen is an RIP Poppy Barlow Facebook page- with people who never knew her or the Barlows (included some friends ive always considered quite intelligent) liking the page...thats just plain odd and intrusive to me

I've seen that Facebook page too - it came up on my facebook feed courtesy of someone I am genuinely surprised at.

I think 'Northernlurker' is absolutely right. Why is it distressing to report that a baby has been born but not survived? I think the Barlows must be coming to terms that their baby was very much loved and cherished but now they have to say their goodbyes. Why should it be hushed up? its not the 1950's.

'the power of mumsnet to stop people buying newspapers'

....i think you over estimate the power of mn.

As Gary Barlow is all over Twitter with his sad loss, thanking people - then I have to say it goes with the territory.

Why do people buy newspapers though? It's all on the internet now, everything is old news by the time it's in print.

A lot of the older generation prefer newspapers, and people who do buy them aren't really buying them for the breaking news - more for the features, columnists, gossip, crosswords, tv listings etc

Am I the only one who thought this was about Coronation Street Barlows?

muppet

I think that due to the fact it was announced by the family, with regular updates via Twitter, there is a natural progression to a statement being made to keep people up to date. The family have issued a short statement and gone to grieve together (god love them), it's the media that are churning it out over and over.

The press do love to sell their drivel wares though, they have as per normal eeked out every possible column inch and it is this I find hard to swallow.

The headline got to the point. No puns or headline that needed further reading.

Just hope they will respect the family privacy at this sad time