Rotherham Sex Scandal – Day 14 – Advertiser must tell us the truth!

Andrew Norfolk and the Times, finally brought to everyone’s attention, an issue Rotherham Politics had been raising for many months, with limited success beyond our readership.

The Rotherham Advertiser has caught up somewhat for lost time in the last two editions but has still to get at some of the central issues involved, put the questions to those responsible, insist they give answers and then make them public, so that us plebs, can judge for ourselves. That is, after all, one of the prime functions of a free press in this country!

I raised more than an eyebrow when, after reading the reporting this week, I started on the letters and came across the following words from an anonymous correspondent:

“I’m getting the impression from your coverage (last week) that a meeting between the Advertiser and the police and Rotherham Council took place to discuss how best to deal with reporting this crime. The effect this has had on your reports is obvious. I urge you to balance it out.”

Unless I missed it, the Advertiser have neither reported on this to readers, nor did they deny the implication in the letter that a meeting had taken place, in an editorial aside, for example, after the letter!

Has the ‘Tiser been sworn to secrecy by SY Police and RMBC and this was the only way they felt they had to let us know? We should be told!

Remember SY Police and RMBC, we have been told in the Times and Advertiser, are the selfsame organisations that have kept these harrowing facts from us for sixteen years! Why should we be surprised therefore, that they would still be trying to minimise the embarrassment to themselves, now!

This is just the time for the Advertiser to stand up for us, get at the full truth and publish it! Not for them to be co-opted into being ‘careful’ in their reporting. That approach is censorship, pure and simple!

6 thoughts on “Rotherham Sex Scandal – Day 14 – Advertiser must tell us the truth!

  1. I have just read the following on Rotherham Politics, a quote from a letter in the Advertiser: “I’m getting the impression from your coverage (last week) that a meeting between the Advertiser and the police and Rotherham Council took place to discuss how best to deal with reporting this crime. The effect this has had on your reports is obvious. I urge you to balance it out.”

    The writer of the letter to the Advertiser is obviously under the impression a meeting was held, but according to Rotherham Politics it must be fact because the next paragraph on the posting reads: “Unless I missed it, the Advertiser have neither reported this important fact to readers, nor denied it!”

    Important fact? So this is factual? The meeting actually happened? Have I missed something?

    Like

    • Thank you Paul for picking me up on careless drafting, change it to what I really meant it to say as soon as I’ve had my tea.
      Welcome to Rotherham Politics. We are amateurs and welcome any feed back from a professional like yourself.

      Like

  2. Irrespective of the above, what is most disconcerting is the Advertiser’s apparent obsession with the Town’s image – who gives a stuff about such a puerile superficiality, when the seriousness of the subject is on such a tragically human level.

    Get real Advertiser and do what you used to do so well – you would be well advised to avoid being sucked into the Council’s and Police’s desperately sad and devious world of manipulating public relations.

    Like

    • Dear Trambuster, oh how I do so agree with your sentiments on this issue.

      It is noticeable to me that since the retirement of the great newshound Howard Poucher, and more lately the retirement of editor Doug Melloy, the Tiser has become almost a 4-colour carbon copy of the reviled “Rovrum News” that Town Hall Towers used to try and brainwash us with.

      Come on, Tiser, sharpen thi’ knife and get busy carving scoop news for t’readers.

      Like

  3. I have to agree on the content of the Advertiser. It lacks punch and is too pro RMBC for my liking.The letters page in the 5th October edition was most revealing, with comment from two Union reps. Why? What has this to do with trades unions? Showing solidarity with their Labour colleagues? I hear that the so called Unite againt Fascism is going to hold a counter demonstatrion against the EDL – oh how helpful is that?
    Is the Advertiser in the same state as the Guardian? Is it relying on council advertising to keep it afloat? I wouldn’t have thought so. I am nearly at my wits end trying to find a way to get some action on this but I know that mob rule and weak reporting won’t help

    Like

    • They have a right to state their views.

      Having read the advertiser you misrepresent the letters from the trade unionists

      They do not defend the actions and coverup

      It’s a fact he calls for a full independent inquiry and holding those responsible to account.

      Like

Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.