Happy murderer photos

[Iwanttoliveonamountain]

With all the stuff yesterday about the Southport killer’s Photo I see a photo today of a man who killed three people in a horrific manner, but they’ve got a lovely smiley photo of him. Do newspapers try to modify our reactions to a murderer by publishing a positive or negative Photo of the murderer?

When is the photo from ?

No.

However I suspect your mind is made up, and this was not a genuine question.

The idea that the media are trying to make us less outraged by publishing a smiley picture is just ridiculous. They are only interested in selling papers, not thought control...

Of course they don't - they publish the photos available to them until after the trial, when they're permitted to publish the mugshots. There's not some grand conspiracy, it's the way it's always been in the UK.

Newspapers will publish whatever photo they can legally get their hands on.

If someone has very little social media presence, they may have a very limited choice.

Are you talking about the crossbow murders? He hasn't been found guilty yet, so the media can only publish pictures they can get hold of, which tend to be from social media or supplied by people who know them and so are inevitably smiley. If they're found guilty, the police release the arrest photo, which is the one we're now seeing of the Southport killer.

The press are generally limited by what photos are available in the public domain. Mug shots are almost never made available prior to conviction, so the press can’t use them. They generally have to use photos from social media, or those supplied by people who knew the person and had a photo of them. Naturally, photos from these sources tend to be more flattering.

The press are rarely going to be interested in making a murderer look better rather than worse.

Do you think the press is going to set-up a photoshoot? They use photos they have. And generally people don't "look like murderers" (whatever that means) on their online photos.

Also, its actually interesting to see that an evil person doesn't necessary look evil.

Thanks for the replies that understood what I was saying and no thanks at all for those who imply that I’m some sort of conspiracy theorist course I’m not.

No they publish the photos they can get their hands on - most often mugshots. Criminals often smile in mugshots - for a range of reasons. Why would anyone feel differently about his crime based on whether he is smiling in a photo or not?

Of course they do. They want to get the best possible reaction. Leaving humans aside, when reporting on an attack by an XL bully (for example) you'll always get a photo of one of them snarling, mouth agape. It's deliberately provocative.

It's not just photos, it's general reporting: so-and-so, who is a single parent and lives on such-and-such estate. Or the colour of someone's car and the make and model. It's not relevant to the story and it instantly creates an opinion in the readers'/viewers' minds.

Probably, there are all sorts of subtle things that the news does to sway public opinion. It’s the same as describing “the teenager” the”18 year old man” both are accurate but have different connotations

Hmm. Would Trump have won if Musk hadn't bought X?

He’s guilty so the Mirror writes but still the nice photos.

How many threads "asking" the same thing...

And I thought I was the first

Of course the press will chose the image to go with the narrative/agenda they prefer, IF there is a choice of course.

Thats why dog attack stories typically use a stock image of a dog barking furiously so its mouth is wide open, spit flying etc... rather than a real image of the actual dog curled up on the sofa with a teddy.

So yes if there is an option of several images they may choose a nicer image or one that makes the person look really dodgy, depending on what 'side' they're on.

If there is only one image of the killer as an adorable little kid though.. they will use that.

Err probably, yes.

What has that got to do with the question of whether UK "newspapers" - unclear whether this means owners, editors, or journalists - are trying to manipulate the public into thinking that actually this murderer is quite a nice bloke cos look at his happy little face?

Do newspapers try to modify our reactions to a murderer by publishing a positive or negative Photo of the murderer?

Hello. I used to be a press officer in the criminal justice system and my DP is a former newspaper journalist who was for many years a crime correspondent.

The newspapers absolutely do not try to modify reactions to murderers with the pictures they publish. If anything, it's the other way round. If they can, they use a range of pictures to build a full profile of the killer, so they will use a 'happy' picture alongside a grim mugshot. They're not trying modify anything or manipulate reactions. If anything they're just trying to build a full and accurate account of the person involved.

Often, it completely depends on what photos are available. Killers' families rarely provide the press with photos so if the killer didn't have any social media, or a wide circle of acquaintances. the police mugshots and photos snapped as the killer is led to a prison van are the only photos made available to the press and it's often all they'll have available unless they can get on to the killer's Facebook or something.

What are you saying?

The idea that "the newspapers" are trying to "modify our reactions" is e very definition of a conspiracy theory. So I am not implying it, I am saying it - this is a conspiracy theory which not only has no evidence to support it, it only takes a few minutes of thinking about to realise it's a ridiculous idea.

What do "the newspapers" stand to gain if we all think actually maybe he's not such a bad bloke; and how bloody stupid do you think we the public are, if you think we're going to think he's actually just a poor misunderstood little boy? Neither of those things makes any sense at all, so why are you thinking they might be true?

You are seriously joking. All newspapers have a political stance that’s why we have left-wing right wing centralists newspapers and they use pictures photos and language that supports their viewpoint. That’s what being a journalist is all about. That’s why different newspapers have a different angle on the story that’s not conspiracy that’s just a fact.

None of the photos printed about the person who murdered a family member were smiling

Some of the papers might deliberately use an “innocent” looking photo for contrast to sensationalise it as much as they can.
But, what would a “guilty” looking photo look like? Tented fingers? Maniacal eyes? Devil horns?
They may not have access to any photos taken after the crime, like mug shot type photos.
plus if the person was on the run or something, they are probably going to try to look innocent.

They publish photos that they are allowed to at that time. Sometimes they aren’t allowed to publish mug shots, and sometimes they rely on what’s available on that persons public social media.

Do you honestly believe for one second the daily fail wouldn’t have published that crazy mug shot given half the chance?

He has pled guilty to murder but not a separate charge related to sexual assault, he still needs to stand trial for that hence the restrictions. It’s a horrific story and I am desperately sorry for those women and their family.

He was in hospital as he’d tried to kill himself so mug shot wasn’t appropriate at the time. I’m sure one will follow.
Are you suggesting that it was cos he’s white?