Tuesday, 25 November 2014

The Curious Case of the Media Silence

This blog post follows on from yesterday’s review of the acquittal by a jury of the ‘High Down 11’ on all charges of prison mutiny. As regular readers will be aware, these eleven prisoners were involved in a protest against poor conditions and very restrictive regimes at HMP High Down, a Cat-B establishment in Surrey.

During the course of this important three-week trial at Blackfriars Crown Court, much relevant evidence was called by the prosecution on the background to the prisoners’ protest which took place in October 2013. This included explanations of how the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) has imposed national benchmarking on prisons and how the so-called New Ways of Working system has impacted on staffing levels, regimes and prisoners’ access to amenities such as showers, gym, exercise, association and payphones, as well as reducing opportunities to participate in work and education at the prison.

HMP High Down: airbrushed out?
As I mentioned in my last post, even High Down’s governing governor, Ian Bickers, ended up in the witness box explaining to the judge and jury how government-imposed changes implemented in September 2013 had impacted negatively on his establishment and its inmates. He observed that governors have lost much of their autonomy over daily regimes and also included a very candid admission that the MOJ has admitted that it might have ‘got it wrong’ over low staff numbers at High Down.

This, in itself, could be considered a pretty ground-breaking state of affairs, because in effect, many aspects of the impact of New Ways of Working could be said to have been on trial. Was the prisoners’ protest – which wasn’t violent (at least not until the Tornado Team were called in to break it up) – a legitimate and justified way of complaining about conditions that were becoming intolerable? Certainly the jury’s unanimous not guilty verdict might suggest that it was, in their eyes at least.

In common with most readers, I consider this information – much of which it should be remembered was given as evidence on oath in a major criminal trial – would have been of public interest, not least because it is the taxpayer who is picking up the bill for Chris Grayling’s flights of ideological fancy and Daily Mail headline grabbing efforts. Yet to date, the only newspaper to have covered the story – and its journalists have done it brilliantly – is the local Sutton Guardian. There hasn’t been a whisper about the case anywhere else other than on blogs and social media. Why?

The only media reporting the trial
Had the eleven cons been convicted last week of prison mutiny, they could have expected to receive hefty additional terms on top of their sentences of up to a maximum of ten years each. I’d say that in itself was newsworthy at a time when there is mounting public concern over the way in which UK prisons are being run. Whenever there has been a serious assault at a prison, it seems to make the news whether the alleged victim has been a screw or a con, yet a mass trial – perhaps it wouldn’t be unfair to dub it a ‘show trial’ – involving eleven prisoners gets passed over in almost complete silence. 

Not even The Guardian, which has a decent prison and probation section, as well as several ex-cons writing regularly for it, has managed to publish a single word to date about the High Down 11 trial, the important evidence called, the acquittals of the accused on all charges and the wider implications of the jury’s verdict for the way in which the Prison Service handles non-violent protests by prisoners whose repeated and often justified complaints are simply being ignored. Frankly I find it astonishing that media titles that are normally falling over themselves to highlight the latest gaffs and policy disasters to engulf Chris Grayling and his dysfunctional MOJ remain silent over this case. 

Grayling: silence is golden
The Daily Mail, which is normally quick to give cons a good bashing at every opportunity, has also been conspicuous by its silence. There have been no snide editorials about the High Down trial or complaints over the acquittals and the risk of further disturbances in prisons. It is almost as if the entire event, from protest to trial, has been airbrushed out of history, no doubt much to the relief of Mr Grayling, the government and the Prison Service, not to mention the Crown Prosecution Service.

Of course, it is just possible that all the national media titles and news channels completely missed the story and have failed to appreciate its much wider significance for penal policy in the UK and the right of prisoners to engage in legitimate protests. Occasionally big stories do slip through the net or under the radar, particularly when trials take place months after the original incident. I accept that this omission could just be a massive cock-up, but I’m not convinced about it.

Or has some form of D-notice been issued to silence everyone in the mainstream media (other than the brave little Sutton Guardian) just in case wider protests by cons against poor prison conditions are encouraged and the safety of the state endangered? I don’t know about you, but I think we should all be told.

18 comments:

  1. Well...someone should create a banner saying something about the High Down 11 and display it behind a reporter for BBC, ITV, C4 or C5! That's the way to do it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comments. I agree... this is an astonishing situation. I've contacted The Guardian, The Independent etc and no-one seems interested in what I reckon is a major public interest story about prisons.

      What is particularly annoying is that instead of the High Down 11 acquittals - and the evidence given in court about MOJ policies and poor conditions - The Guardian prisons and probation section is running a lame piece about prison designer fashions in Peru... you really can't make stuff like that up!

      Delete
  2. Hi Alex - this is astonishing. Have you contacted Nick Cohen, or Aditya Chakraborty, or Paul Mason, or Michael Crick, directly as opposed to via their editors? If any of those radical journalists are wilfully ignoring significant behind bars mutinies happening as a result of Government policy on the prison regime, then that's pretty shocking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi, I've contacted pretty much every journalist I know, plus Tweeting Alan Rusbridger at The Guardian. Profound silence thus far and no real interest, I'm afraid. The prison mutiny acquittals - probably the biggest prison story of the year and a massive slap in the chops for Grayling from a jury has passed under the radar. Pathetic in the extreme!

      Delete
    2. Private Eye?

      Delete
    3. I emailed Nick Davies through his website. (I mentioned him in a previous comment - he wrote "Flat Earth News" and did a lot to expose the phone hacking.)

      Here's his reply:
      -------------------------

      I see what you mean. I was quite unaware of the trial, I’m afraid. I’ll try to get somebody at the Guardian interested.


      Thanks for pointing it out

      -------------------

      Well, I'm not holding my breath, but it's interesting that he says he wasn't aware of the trial, rather than dismissing it as a non-story.

      Richard

      Delete
    4. Thanks for all the above comments. At last a real journalist, Ian Dunt at Politics.co.uk, has covered the story so it is getting much more online exposure: http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/11/26/grayling-s-prison-regime-goes-on-trial-and-is-found-guilty.

      What astonishes me is the complete and utter failure of The Guardian (and to a lesser extent The Independent) to challenge Chris Grayling and the MOJ over the revelations about the prisons crisis which were made in evidence, on oath, by the High Down governor, Ian Bickers.

      Last week, at the time of the trial, the Guardian prisons and probation section ran with a piece of puffery about prisoners in Peruvian jails making designer clothing. Relevance to our prison crisis: minimal. Probably an article that might have been found in the Big Issue on a thin news week.

      In today's Guardian we had a short, but worthy enough little article on the Swedish prison system, written by Erwin James. Interesting - I posted a few comments and one received 120+ recommends - but again, very general and not particularly hard-hitting. It's as if everyone on the newsdesk has dozed off.

      All this fades into insignificance when compared with the verdict in the 'High Down 11' trial with the epic jury rebuff to Team Grayling and its failing 'New Ways of Working' benchmarking which is wrecking havoc across the prison estate and making jails much less safe and decent, not to mention effectively abandoning all pretence of rehabilitating anyone.

      What is the national media for? Is this silence a cock-up or a conspiracy of silence? I honestly don't know, but thank God for Ian Dunt and Politics.co.uk.

      Delete
  3. Maybe Grayling is on his way out...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I only wish I shared that view. Sadly, I'm not convinced that we'll see the last of 'Crisis' Chris and his ideological fantasy world in May 2015. But we can always hope!

      Delete
  4. Governments r corrupt i bet it was silenced by gov due to the shame factor n further prisoner action. Vas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comment, Vas. I just can't get to the truth of this. Either it has been a massive oversight by the national media - and the editors don't want to admit it - or else something much more sinister is happening in the background. I really don't know, although I do have some suspicions!

      Delete
  5. Do you reckon all prisons will be privatised?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your question - which is a very good one! To be honest, I suspect that the private sector prison movement has largely stalled at the moment because of the rising crisis across the prison estate. However, I can't rule out that a future government - of any configuration - won't try to revive the process as a short-term means of shifting responsibility.

      If they were properly run, then private sector prisons might pose a serious challenge to the public sector, but as the ongoing saga at HMP Oakwood demonstrates, conditions are poor and the whole prison appears dysfunctional and chaotic. That's not a great advertisement for private sector investment!

      To be honest, I'd quite like to see one prison - probably a medium-size Cat-C trainer - being run by a not-for-profit consortium of penal reformers, prison charities and experienced prison staff to see whether it could be operated successfully with a focus on real rehabilitation and reducing reoffending. My vision would be of a more democratic and therapeutic environment, but for 'ordinary' Cat-C cons rather than high or very high riskers. It would be very interesting to see whether this model would produce more positive outcomes than the present punitive system.

      Delete
    2. It would be a pretty fundamental attack on the rule of law to order the papers not to report a given trial. Would it be worth it for something like this? Easier to just let them report in the reliable way that they usually do about such matters (against the inmates and for the system, whatever the verdict) ---and hey presto, all sorted. Most of them would have done just that; and those that didn’t wouldn’t have mattered.

      None of the trial was reported. If the authorities felt that it wasn’t going to look good before it even began (a conclusion logically required before a whole-trial reporting ban), the CPS would be unlikely to have charged the grave mutiny offence in the first place .... it not being ‘in the public interest’, as they say.

      On a more mundane note ------if a notice had been issued, then the Sutton Guardian was the bravest of the brave, or unaware that such a thing was around. Both of those possibilities seem unlikely.

      The romantic in me wants it to have been something like a D notice. An irresponsibly uninterested fourth estate seems the most likely thing to explain the omission, to me anyways. But who knows.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for your comments. I've not found any evidence of a D-notice or anything similar and now that Ian Dunt has run with the story on Politics.co.uk without any repercussions, I suppose that the real issue is the massive incompetence of the national media to have missed the significance of such a major prison trial...

      Delete
  6. You'll know that it's now been reported in today's Guardian. Thank you for being persistent and keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comments. I have seen Eric's excellent piece. I contacted him and I know that he was very keen to get an article on the trial in the Guardian, so I'm delighted that he has now persuaded the editors it is an important case. Onward and upward!

      Delete
  7. Great piece and yes it is shocking no media picked it up

    Eric Allison of the Guardian also picked up another story a few years ago, virtually ignored by the mainstream media

    A convicted murderer was accused of attempting to murder prison guards at Frankland.

    He was acquitted and questions were asked about the Frankland prison regime (he had accused them of racism) but nothing was ever mentioned in the press

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/nov/14/frankland-prison-kevan-thakrar

    Thanks for your excellent work as always. Can I ask how it is you come to hear about the various prison disturbances across the country?

    ReplyDelete