Brian Kearney Murder Trial: RTÉ News reports
Posted on Wednesday, February 20, 2008UPDATE
I’ve just got the news that the jury have returned a guilty verdict. I think Brian kearney more than likely did commit murder, but I still think the conviction is unsafe, and I’ve explained why here:
______________________________
I don’t know much about this case, and I don’t intend to say anything about the guilt or innocence of Brian Kearney, the man accused of murdering his wife, Siobhán Kearney. The evidence is still being presented in the case, and a jury will eventually decide.
All I want to ask is this:
What’s the appropriate way for RTÉ television news to refer to the people involved? Somehow, I don’t like the way they call the defendant “Mr Kearney”, while referring to the murder victim as “Siobhán”.
Why?
What would be wrong with “Ms Kearney”? Or “Siobhán Kearney”?
After all, they’d never call the defendant “Brian”, now would they?
Stumble it!
February 20th, 2008
Hey, you always call me Mr Darwin! Am I a murder suspect now?
Funny, I had a bone to pick with them today too.
February 20th, 2008
It’s kind of weird, but you see it all the time. Hillary Clinton often gets referred to as Hillary, unlike Obama who is rarely referred to as Barack. But I guess this is so as not to confuse her with Bill?
Also, it’s rare for women to go by their initials and last name. Remember when J.K. Rowling first wrote her book and we all presumed she was a bloke?
February 20th, 2008
Darwin: In future, I’ll call you Charles.
Annie: This instance seems to be a bit different. The contrast between the formal description “Mr Kearney” and the familiar “Siobhán” carries subtle judgemental overtones that a professional journalist ought to be aware of.
Oops! Did I say professional?
RTÉ?
February 20th, 2008
I’m sure you are way ahead of me, but to my mind it is to create an implicit distance between us and the accused, while cuasing us to empathise with the victim who is clearly on a first name basis with us. Thereby whipping up a stronger emotional response and selling my “copy”. Feel manipulated much?
February 20th, 2008
All except the “selling” bit. RTÉ don’t have to compete with anyone. They get loads of licence money to keep them snug and warm in their bubble.
February 20th, 2008
I agree with Thriftcriminal but for an outfit with no competition to be falling so hard and fast into these US-style manipulative production techniques -for no actual reason - is reprehensible.
February 20th, 2008
They usually call her ‘the mother of one’ on any report I’ve heard.
February 20th, 2008
Six o’clock news this evening. New policy perhaps. Did you happen to notice if they call Brian Kearney a father of one?
February 21st, 2008
Course, one of the very few who championed men’s rights was the blogger’s own best friend, John Waters. Where is when you need him Bock.
February 21st, 2008
Nice piece of phycho-journalism analysis.
If left unremarked we could absorb this stuff by default.
Unfortunately this is just more of the shite standard of modern journalism, and this in an age when we have colleges teaching it and degrees in the stuff.
God be with the days when substance won over froth, or am I imagining it.
Back to the hand-me-downs.
February 21st, 2008
Journalism college? Do they teach English there?
I wonder if they taught the RTÉ journalist who thought Benazir Bhutto’s mausoleum was pronounced “Musoleum”?
February 21st, 2008
I haven’t been following the case, Bock, so this is new to me. I’d agree with Annie and Fat MammyCat that the press routinely takes an overly familiar tone when speaking about women by using their first names or by referring to them in their traditional role as wife and mother. The result is bad for both women and men because it’s based on a limited view of gender and identity.
February 21st, 2008
Medbh: Yes. There’s always an element of that, and it makes me uncomfortable. However, the news reporter tonight was a woman, and I felt it had more to do with sending a subliminal message of solidarity with Siobhán’s family, against a man who hasn’t been convicted of anything yet.
This isn’t to suggest that he’s innocent. In fact, the evidence against him looks pretty strong, but it’s not the role of our media to pre-judge a court case, or to plant ideas in people’s minds.
In my opinion, it’s either cynical manipulation or ignorance.
I lean towards ignorance as an explanation, but a sinister kind of ignorance. I think they’re crudely trying to tell us they think he’s guilty, which is a bit presumptuous of them, or maybe they think the courts are an unnecessary luxury.
Is this, perhaps, journalistic hubris running free?
February 21st, 2008
Having just paid a flying visit for a parental burial may I comment on the voyaristic (spellcheck) attitude of both print and electronic media in Ireland to gratuitous details of murder, rape and assault cases.
Every tiny detail of each case is referred to and dealt with at length.
What matter is it to me what knickers she wore or didn’t, who they knew or what they did as they were pummelled into the dark.
I don’t need to know the details of someones last breath, have it sold to me over my morning cornflakes like some penny potboiler.
These details are court room items and should be left there. We don’t need to feed the minds of small people all over the land with these details.
My mother spent the last years of her life listening to this stuff and cleared the house of knives and sharp implements, just in case her house was ever broken into.
She locked her doors thinking the country was full of murderers and rapists and all the time it was only the media filling her head with the details.
What a way to live your life.
Thanks for your time.
February 21st, 2008
Spot on, Mr The Robber.
It has all degenerated from the tabloid headline writers needs to sub-edit news into three words. So we have “Siobhán’s last hours” etc etc. RTE is stuck into this dumbanddumber contest because it IS a commercial entity. It competes for listeners with other stations in order to maintain its commercial revenue. In order to do that it has obviously decided editorially not to sound old-fashioned by comparison with other media.
Language carries messages at different levels so yes, their reportage deliberately invites empathy with the victim and, implicitly, it suggests that the defendant is guilty before a verdict has been arrived at.