AIBU to think the BBC should not air sympathetic neighbour clips?

[ForsterMcLennan]

A man is on the run after probably murdering his family - and the BBC makes the editorial decision to play a clip of a man who looked after their swimming pool. He was a “softly spoken man” apparently, a nice guy looking forward to his daughter’s sports day. I am furious. If this is the only background they have, ditch it. A monster made into a cuddly, kind dad. I can’t believe you would run this.

It’s not sympathetic to anyone! It’s an opinion on his character from someone who was 100% wrong! As indeed many people are wrong about others - all the time. It’s just saying “I thought I knew him, but I didn’t”. The bbc hasn’t done anything here! Plus many people are going to be shocked a person they think they know could possibly do this! What’s wrong with saying that! It’s hardly support. It’s stating the obvious.

It’s like they are trying to push the narrative that he just snapped as he couldn’t cope with her divorcing him. Whereas in all likelihood he was a nasty abusive man behind closed doors and she was trying to escape but it’s still somehow her fault. Can’t imagine the terror she and her poor children have felt probably for years and that night.

I think very few tears would be shed if someone were to do him in painfully and slowly in wherever in Zimbabwe he's sneaked off to. I've got a few quid to throw into a GoFundMe if they need hiring for the purpose.

I'm guessing this post probably contravenes the site rules. Sorry, not sorry.

I hate this too. Also the bewildered family & friends of “sweetest family man” interviewed when he is charged with DV.

BBC is propaganda like all media. You can't expect them to do anything with a shred of morals. That's not how they make their money.

I had a client once. I so looked forward to his calls. He was lovely. Chat for ages about anything and everything. A former tv presenter.

And then I found out he’d been in prison for sexually abusing vulnerable people.

The point is, you never know.

I think it's important to know that people who appear to be normal, likeable, friendly in public can also be monsters behind closed doors.

IIRC there was one clip of some teenage girls, who were friends of the older daughter who also said how lovely the mum had been to them all. Then there were quite a fair few clips of various different men saying what a nice bloke the father was.

I hate it too and it's devoid of meaning. So what if he seemed a perfectly nice chap? He clearly wasn't and all it tells us is that he was good at hiding his true character. No surprises there.

I'd dispense completely with vox pops: they're a thing of the past & add nothing to the story. Lazy so-called journalism.

But don't we aleady know that?

Nothing wrong with reinforcing that message.

Ive just looked up Clodagh and her children. Its beyond words how awful all this was.

An anniversary mass for Alan Hawe took place on the first anniversary of his death in Castlerahan, despite his body having been exhumed from there earlier in the year. The relatives of Clodagh Hawe were unaware of who organised the mass and stated they felt the act was disrespectful.

Wtf!

I can't remember the case but there was a man who murdered his ex and his saughter at a leisure ecntre and the surviving sibling did a campaign to stop the media from doinf these 'lovely bloke' type interviews wirh neighbours. These abusive men often have a well polished veneer and the neighbours won't have seen how horrible they really are.

Yes, the ‘a good man who snapped’ narrative is profoundly problematic for a number of reasons.

I don’t believe anyone is pushing that narrative at all! It’s ludicrous to suggest that interviewing a few locals who knew him is making any judgement at all. It’s simply scene setting. Plus it’s very very normal to ask people if they know a suspect and what they think. Heaven help us if ordinary folk are not allowed to say anything and I’m fed up with attacks on standard journalistic practice. Nobody was saying anything and not everyone gets concerned about neighbours views. I’d get a life!

It’s almost like news, journalism, and info sources are run in a stupid way by twats, isn’t it?

Agree. They’re not saying ‘nice guy’, they’re saying he seemed like a nice guy. Crucial difference.

@AuntieNorma It’s standard journalism! It’s ok to ask for opinions and we all know it’s neutral and not supportive or hostile. It’s just ordinary people giving an opinion. As you just have.

Quite! And this is exactly why they do it - a reminder that people don't go around with the word 'monster' written on their forehead. It's not glorifying what they did, it's not giving them an alternative narrative as 'actually a good person despite heinous act' - this is the genuine reaction of their neighbours. What is wrong with broadcasting genuine reactions? It's how a community comes to terms with what unbelievable evilness has taken place in their space. No one in an interview has ever said: "He seemed like such a nice bloke, he washed our windows, and I still think he's a nice bloke." They say: "He seemed like such a nice bloke, he washed our windows, I would never have thought he was capable of such a despicable act and I feel so very sorry for the family."

Exactly, they're not running a PowerPoint on all of his 'best bits'! They are talking to people - who agree to be talked to - about how they are coming to terms with the situation. It's what is at the heart of community actually. How people process information and still live in their local area. It's actually a profound part of starting to feel safe at home again after learning that the people that you thought you knew are not as safe as you once thought. It's why people go to candlelight vigils for people they have never met - to reconnect with community. I guess lots of people on here live in their own houses and never engage with those around them? It's a fundament of rebuilding trust in where you live and how you live and who lives close to you.

Thank you for making this point about Clodagh Hawes, and for remembering her.

why on earth would you rather pretend that killers and abusers have a specific "abuser" face and it cannot be more obvious that they are abusers?

How would that help anyone?

Surely the whole point is that you don't know what happens behind closed door?

Or are you trying to shame the victims, by saying they should have known because it was obvious? Really?

as opposed to: they knew, everybody knew, but decided to ignore it and let him get away with it?

Or more victim blaming?