|
An even more fascinating aspect of the Proctor press conference is the confusion in the media. The Mail, for example. Loads of print coverage of Proctor; very little online. In some cases this may be a "time" thing - some articles go online the moment they are published, then get dropped but still make it in print. Media are finding this very upsetting. Some find sympathy for Proctor and the huge quantity of falsely accused. Indeed, even perpetrators ("it's such a great story") like EXARO were loud in condemning false accusers (Ben Flowers in the Ken Clarke case) though they tend, like judges, to say "mistaken" rather than "lies".
The majority find it hugely disturbing that sources for great stories might be getting suppressed. Others with agendas (like the pro-feminist Guardian) are horrified by the concept of the word "doubt".
Which side to we go on? That is the dilemma. Of course the answer is - there ARE no sides. Like everything the reality is complex, not simple. But twenty first century society (the Devil's weapon is superficiality) cannot cope with more than slogans and headlines.
Is it just me or are those praising and/or criticising Exaro for their defence of "Nick" missing the point (as most juries do). The question is NOT whether or not the man is speaking the truth. It is whether he BELIEVES he is speaking the truth. That is the terrible reality that gets many innocent men and women convicted. Witnesses really believe they are telling the truth and convince juries of that, which juries (and judges and media) cannot understand is a totally different thing from telling the truth. Someone who truly believes they were abducted by aliens may not have been abducted by aliens.
|
