- BBC - "Activists have called for a full public inquiry into the death of a man during the G20 protests".
- The Times - "Most of all, it is the story of how the police wilfully criminalised and alienated 4,000 innocent people".
- The Observer - "Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests".
My thoughts - please feel free to disagree
I think they have become ultimately risk-averse, or in common parlance, have lost their balls. They are gagging themselves.
How did this come about?
I will leave you to do the research if you don't know about any of these steps:
- The Kelly inquiry, following Gilligan's reporting, leaving the BBC reeling and uncertain about its role;
- The BBC management decides to favour a risk-averse stance;
- The corporates smell blood and applied pressure in all the right places (ie the BBC management);
- The advertising downturn leads to the other media giants suffering a squeeze, and becoming even more jealous of the licence fee;
- Meanwhile, the courts are issuing more and more gagging orders for various media stories, which are themselves unreportable because of the gagging orders;
- There are a number of minor cock-ups at the BBC, leading up to Brand/Ross one - which was media generated, two weeks after the event...
So, read the Guardian, the blogs, Indymedia and the like, and try not to be too paranoid.
UPDATE: 6th April - At last the BBC is reporting that:
Witnesses have come forward and told the IPCC Mr Tomlinson had "contact" with officers before he collapsed.The page was updated at 16:19 GMT, Monday, 6 April 2009 17:19 UK.