It was inevitable that certain newspapers would claim that the life-long anonymity granted to Maxine Carr by the British high court is a threat to press freedom. As so often, when the popular press bleats about its so-called rights being whittled away, it is really complaining about constraints on its ability to do just as it likes.
In the case of Carr, that means the ability to identify her, publicize her whereabouts and, inevitably, harass her and intrude into her privacy. Such information would also enable vigilante justice to be meted out by people who have been encouraged -- by those same papers -- to believe she is evil.
We know it would happen because there have been at least six incidents in which people mistaken for Carr have been assaulted and abused, sometimes by mobs. There have also been threats to her life aired in internet chatrooms.
Tabloids such as the People and the Daily Express -- two of the worst offenders -- would like us to believe that revenge plays no part in their editorial agenda. They merely wish to inform their readers of the facts and it is not their fault if the public misbehaves.
The facts? They cannot be serious. As the court was told, many of the stories published in recent months about Carr are wholly false while others that do contain a kernel of truth have been exaggerated and distorted.
Carr never did go away on a "drink-fueled weekend" with a boyfriend. Nor, as the Sun claimed, was she rescued from a mob in a helicopter at a cost to the taxpayer of ?15,000. She was not enjoying, as the Daily Mail alleged, a pampered lifestyle. She most definitely had not been involved in negotiations with a publisher to write a book for ?1 million, or indeed any amount. In the latest example, the Sun ran a splash story headlined "Mad Maxine shaves head." Her solicitor, Roy James, says unequivocally that this is untrue.
Given so much evidence of false stories (none of which, incidentally, has ever been corrected by the papers), how could editors be relied on to provide the facts?
All that, and there is much more of the same, is exacerbated by the context in which the stories have been presented. For example, the Sun's shaven- head story also gloated over the fact that the woman had "gone to pieces". It claimed she had had a nervous breakdown, which is yet another untrue allegation (though it is fair to say that she is in a fragile state, which is hardly surprising in the circumstances).
Many of the tabloids' leading articles about Carr have been vicious and hyperbolic, equating her with the Moors murderer Myra Hindley and whipping up the kind of public hysteria guaranteed to incite misguided people to take the law into their own hands. The Daily Express last week referred to her having "committed an abominable crime" and said she "got off so lightly" that she "does not deserve taxpayer-funded protection." She should therefore live with "the stark and brutal consequences" of what she did. This must surely rank as one of the most callous and irresponsible statements ever made by a national newspaper. By implication it seeks to legitimize vigilante action against her.
Her crime involved lying for a man with whom she was infatuated. She foolishly tried to cover up for him. She did not murder the two girls at Soham, nor did she aid and abet their murders. She was tried, convicted and served her time. The law has run its course but the papers -- and people heavily influenced by the reactionary views of such papers -- refuse to move on. The tabloid kangaroo court does not believe in the concept of repentance and rehabilitation so it continues to persecute Carr.
It is interesting that almost every paper is exercised by the fact -- well, alleged fact -- that it will cost ?50 million to protect Carr for her lifetime. Yet, needless to say, no editor would admit that the huge cost of guarding Carr from the public is entirely due to the way in which newspapers have portrayed her.
Like the child murderer Mary Bell before her, and the two boys who killed James Bulger, Carr is a prisoner of the tabloids. It was sad to see in Friday's Times a commentary by its legal editor in which she suggested that "some lawyers" (unnamed) were concerned that these exceptional cases marked another step towards "a new privacy law by stealth."
They do no such thing. They mark another step in the downhill march of standards in the popular newspapers. Even with the injunction in place, it is clear that papers will continue to make Carr's life a misery by retailing untrue tales about her. It is a truly sickening prospect.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this