Boycott Marie Claire after Leveson - Margaret Watsons Evidence

[bkgirl]

As a Marie Claire reader I was absolutely horrified to hear Margaret Watsons testimony and frankly how it's bad reporting led to the death of her 15 year old son. I will NEVER spend a penny on this rag again.
The apology was pathetic, I am so sorry that I did not appreciate what I was indirectly funding before.
I always thought that Marie Claire was above the gutter press, heck was I wrong.
Here is a link
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-15834121

Nancy66 - It would be hard for people to boycott something before they've heard of the incident in question.

And that's one of the points, surely: inequality of access to the media of representation and dissemination; inequality of "voice".

So, a big periodical (in this instance Marie Claire) publishes a version of events; the Watson's are unable to represent their version of events with any degree of equality.

They have extraordinarily few avenues of redress. Until the Levenson Inquiry. And let's face it, they are getting a lot less coverage than Hugh Grant et al and their stories of intrusion and misrepresentation. They really are representative of the "little" people that keep being invoked.

I feel extremely sorry for that family. I do wonder if there is any way to provide equality of representation and to ease the processes of putting right mis-representations. Press Complaints seem pretty toothless, especially in a situation like this. Legal routes ... not for ordinary people really. I doubt the Levinson Inquiry will come up with anything that will work for ordinary people who get caught up in national media stories.

I do wonder if it boils down to a kind of thoughtlessness in a situation like this, though. Blaming a murder victim for their own death is bizarre, really. Even in a story attempting to provide background and substance to the demonised figure of a child-who-kills. Ironic, really: an attempt to humanise one figure turning into a failure to fully comprehend the realness and human-ness of the other figures. With tragic results.

And a warning, I think, for all of us who leap onto issues and stories we read and forget the real-ness of the humans involved.

(I have to admit, with that in mind, I don't think I can find it in myself to berate the journalist involved, or the magazine in question. Rather, I think, I'll hope for things such as better equality of redress and representation; and for people to think hard about the realness and humanity of those they write and read about. . and of course, wish for better for the Watsons and those like them.)

Nancy66
Even if the Watson case has only just come to light to a wider public, why should people NOT stage a boycott? It's about the principle, something about which journos know very little, granted, but surely you can understand it in a ourely intellectual level even if in the execution of your job, you leave all principles atthe front door?

... having thought a little bit more about the boycott thing though ...

I do think that readers have to step up and take on our responsibilities. Media have been taking this route because their readership (me and others) reward them for it, and genuinely seem to like it. It really is up to us to actually stop buying periodicals and papers that act like this.

If we want well-researched, non-celebrity, non-sensational stuff, we have to go out and put our money there, or write in and say how much we like it when they publish stuff we do like.

And I am glad that the OP flagged up this story - I had missed it.

bkgirl - i try and answer most of the questions put to me - however i can't come on MN during working hours - so if the thread has died in the meantime then I don't tend to answer a question from days ago as it seems a little self indulgent.

I feel extremely sorry for the Watsons too - it was only the Glasgow Herald and then Marie Claire that carried the bullying story - and to be fair it wasn't something they plucked out of thin air - it was part of the defence case during the trial.

MSE is NOT owned by IPC.

The problem with Marie Claire is that that even now, when all this has come out again, they have still not had the decency to apologise to the family, as at least the newspaper involved did do (albeit 20 years too late).

I can't boycott Marie Claire as I would never have bought it anyway.

Still think it's shocking though.

What animula said.