To agree with this Guardian article about the London attack?

[Medeci]

And I NEVER agree with the Guardian
ISIS must be thrilled with all the dramatic media coverage.

medeci, the fact that he used a car and knives does actually appear to give a very strong indication of links to ISIS in itself. It is exactly the sort of attack ISIS have called for using the methods they suggest.

uk.businessinsider.com/isis-al-qaeda-london-attack-2017-3

I agree with you too birds. If attacks like this when there seems to be very little actual doubt that radical Islam was at least partly a motivation or justification it would be counterproductive to pretend that wasn't the case. Rather than making people less scared or easing tensions it would increase them and make them feel they were being lied to by mainstream politicians.

Look at what happened with the grooming gangs in Rotherham. If that had been dealt with properly in the first place it probably wouldn't have been more than a few isolated sexual exploitation cases and a few bent councillors being prosecuted which wouldn't have gone much beyond the local news. Because it was covered up in the name of not fuelling racism it ended up a massive national scandal whigh brought up a lot of uncomfortable questions about race and justice and the impact of political correctness. I think what Jenkins suggests would likely lead to the same.

It was a stabbing in London. They happen every day, sadly.

engineer, you seem to have resorted to answering a question which I didn't ask in order to deflect from the fact that you can't answer the question I did ask.

I didn't speak about Cologne trying to 'make it out to be a daily occurrence'. In fact I mentioned it happened on one specific day. What I asked you about was the fact that the police lied and said that the evening had passed off without incident when in fact it was a near riot which they lost control and hundreds of women were sexually assaulted? Why did the German press refuse to report until the situation went out of control on social media so their hand was forced. Being taken by surprise didn't force the police to lie.

You seem to have ignored that to respond to something I never even said in the first place. What an odd thing to do.

User, it wasn't just a stabbing though, was it?

It was a rampage by a middle aged man that mowed down over twenty pedestrians in his car, knocking one into a river, another into a bus, one onto a walkway some twenty feet below, and then armed himself with two seven inch blades in a hammer grip and attacked a policeman.

Even if you take the religious angle out of it, you are still left with an attack that is out of the ordinary.

Simon Jenkins writes EXACTLY the same article after Paris, Nice, Brussels, Berlin, now London..go back and read them. He knows exactly what the terrorists want and we mustn't give it to them. In fact we mustn't react in any way or it's what tgey want.

At this stage he has the boilerplate article perfected, just has to change the name of the city.

BillSykesDog
The police tried to cover their mistake at not policing a busy public area properly. There were not hundreds of women equally assaulted the numbers were far lower and confidential broadly to specific locations. Don't get me wrong any sexual attack is abhorrent and should not be tolerated but trying to turn this into something it wasn't is also belittling those attacked.

engineer

1200 women according to the Washington Post, Independent. 1000 according to the Guardian. Not exactly the gutter press eh? Figures from leaked police documents. So please don't get sanctimonious about 'belittling those attacked' when you're clearly just making it up as you go along.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/worldviews/wp/2016/07/10/leaked-document-says-2000-men-allegedly-assaulted-1200-german-women-on-new-years-eve/

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/07/german-mps-back-stricter-rape-laws-after-cologne-attacks

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/cologne-new-years-eve-mass-sex-attacks-leaked-document-a7130476.html%3Famp

Of course we have to have news reporting which is open, honest and not skewed or spun.

But he is suggesting a forbearance on speculation, a calming down of pages if coverage referring to 'monster, maniac' etc, innacurate hype about London 'on lockdown ' etc, and I agree with him about that.

I certainly do not agree that it should be viewed or reported as if it was an RTA and neighbourhood knife fight, or that COBRA not be called.

Factual accuracy is what is needed.

But releasing names prematurely, saying London was on 'lockdown', pages of non-news and nothing new to say ramps up the hysteria.

BillSykesDog,
There was a thorough investigation afterward and the actual cases / complaints were around 35. Whilst I'm sure there were more offences committed it was concluded that in no way we're the figures as high as the "gutter" press reported. I find any sexual attack inexcusable but we should not use this as an anti Europe or anti immigrant tool. You have sat in your armchair and Googled for the sensationalist news reports that back up your own narrow viewpoint regardless that they were latter debunked.

I agree with the fact that the media is guilty of hyping up this guy who will become a hero or martyr to those loons who support this evil. I also think the hours of rolling news with commentary from 'experts' and random people with remote connections to the events is just ghoulish unnecessary drama that's just about filling air time. I feel for the victims families that are subjected to this. How insensitive is it to show people who are lying hurt or worse on live TV repeatedly or in newspapers.

The Guardian articles on this incident are not open for comment. I wonder why.

I was wrong they're open today. But the comments pages were closed for 3 days. It's as if they stick their fingers in their ears and sing La la la.

the fact that he used a car and knives does actually appear to give a very strong indication of links to ISIS in itself. It is exactly the sort of attack ISIS have called for using the methods they suggest.
Yes, i know that, its been widely publicised. Which makes it convenient for random psychopaths, with or without links to IS, to kill people and go out in a blaze of publicity.

I really think it's about what sells. It was a shocking crime, but has been inexplicably glorified, when what happens is that a guy had a violent record stretching back decades, was a heavy drinker, took and dealt drugs, later converted to Islam (in prison?) and carried on being a violent criminal to its logical end - murdering people.

At the same time, we also know that men - plain, ordinary men, not "terrorists" (although their victims might beg to differ) murdered 900 women in this country between 2009 and 2015 and how many days of blanket news coverage are given over to this? How many statements from government about how brave we must be, and how we must soldier on, or vigils, or explanations to school children or moments of silence?

There is far worse crime going on in this country, but an attack that can be conveniently othered and described as terrorism (i.e. not "one of us") is more thrilling and exciting, so that is what we report.

attack that can be conveniently othered and described as terrorism

But if it is terrorism, why deny it and call it "othering"? Scotland Yard have been referring to it as a terrorist attack, and were very quickly investigating whether he was acting alone or in association with others. I don't see anything "convenient" about that.

Agree with comnents made by LostSight

I feel for the victims families that are subjected to this. How insensitive is it to show people who are lying hurt or worse on live TV repeatedly or in newspapers.

I agree with this. Information and analysis, yes definitely. Repeated publishing pictures of people which aren't even pixellated for their privacy, no.

I agree completely with Epigab

But if it is terrorism, why deny it and call it "othering"?

No - I mean that a crime that isn't "us" is easier to get outraged about than a crime that is undeniably us. White Anglo-Saxon males murdering their partners and wives at a rate that leaves all other crimes standing (and the rate of attacks that don't end in murder is of course far, far higher and I'm not even including sexual assaults here) is actually more frightening - or should be - because we apparently have no idea how to stop it. So we ignore it. We latch onto a relatively small set of crimes committed by people who are "other" and focus on them instead.

So we ignore it. We latch onto a relatively small set of crimes committed by people who are "other" and focus on them instead

This^ I don't think anyone is objecting to a crime being reported accurately, but this attack was massively sensationalised by the media and by everybody breathlessly following and speculating on social media and Mumsnet

I got caught up in the aftermath of an incident where a man murdered his wife, seriously wounded her son then took himself a few miles up the motorway to finish himself off in front of a passing lorry. The full closure of the motorway for the police to investigate brought the region to gridlock for many hours. Tens of thousands of people were affected in a temporary way by the incident (plus the trauma to the families of his victims and witnesses). It didn't make it beyond the local media, other than national transport news as an incident causing a road closure.

There is a difference in motive, "lone wolf" or actively part of a wider network, there is a difference in someone allying themselves with a global cause to an isolated murder. The fact that organisations such as ISIS or Al Quada exist does affect security assessments, what we can bring through an airport, whether we arm our police etc.

Censorship would be counterproductive and lead to more speculation which would lead to more fear. The whole point of terrorism is to terrify people into submission.

Relatively speaking Wednesday's events were a damp squib in the league of terrorist attacks. That's ABSOLUTELY NOT said to undermine the impact of the deaths and injuries of the victims, rather that potentially, there could have been so many more to suffer the consequences. The incident was dealt with quickly and contained before higher profile targets could be attacked. People showed the best side of human nature, assisting others, getting people out of the way of ham.

It was a rich day for the media. Eyewitnesses included articulate MPs and journalists. People had phones out for sightseeing so the attack was recorded. As Wednesday afternoon and evening unfolded, there was more broadcastable material that could be used before looping.

What matters more is the long term reaction. There do need to be police/ security reviews as a routine course of action. Practical life in London was near normal the next morning. Most people accept that there is a risk of terrorist activity, but it's more worthwhile checking the road thoroughly before crossing. That's where this particular terrorist threat fails, because life goes on unchanged for the masses.

I agree wholeheartedly with it. I looked briefly at the news headlines today and they are all full of stories about the attacker and his life. I question should we even publish their names....the lockdown should be a media one on the attacker, only the Police need to know who he was. I think we are rewarding the behaviour of these people, making their martyrdom widespread for others to see and follow, and giving them the "glory" they think their actions will give them.

No - I mean that a crime that isn't "us" is easier to get outraged about than a crime that is undeniably us. White Anglo-Saxon males murdering their partners and wives at a rate that leaves all other crimes standing

So the Muslims who are killed in terrorist attacks, both here and around the world, are they "us" or not?

Being reluctant to report on a crime as terrorism, in case of 'othering', inadvertently silences, and patronises, Muslim communities.

How can we possibly expect Muslim communities, who are disproportionately affected around the world by such attacks, to report suspicious activity, if the media lead with a conspiracy of silence?

One of the biggest U.K. News stories last year was Jo Cox, in terms of fatalities and injuries a much smaller incident than London. Is a parliamentary MP more important than an parliamentary police man. Both men who carried out the attacks prone to easy radicalisation. I am outraged on both equally but if we ignore ones motive we must ignore the other but both will not go away.

I agree with the article

News has to be reported but there is not need for us to seem others in distress the picture of those injured are appalling and I hope the media are pulled up about this

There is also no need to interview every person that came in to contact with Khalid Masood on the day or day before of course they are in shock but there is no need for this shock to be sensationalised. Yesterday I heard one reporter on the radio who spoke about him staying at the hotel the night before and about the hotel having a car park and well we know why he choose a hotel with a car park and that not many hotels in the area do have car parks wtf was she just trying to fill airtime the car wasn't packed with explosives. And this was on the BBC

It's the sensationalism of the reporting that seems standard now, though less so on the BBC