She’s trying to tell Helen Lewis what was and wasn’t covered in UK media on this story, and then blowing up when Lewis politely corrects her.
Ah yes, the grooming gangs story was confined to the unseen backwaters of …. the Times front page. On multiple occasions. This one is from 2012.
Ah yes, the grooming gangs story was confined to the unseen backwaters of …. the Times front page. On multiple occasions. This one is from 2012.
Could you be clearer on what your argument is here, Helen? I’m not claiming that there was no media coverage, I’m claiming that it was not proportionate to the scale or the severity of the crimes, and included a lot of obfuscation about the ethnicity issue. Do you dispute that? I’m happy to give you a free sub if you’d like to read my piece in full.
You claimed it was “never treated like a Big Deal.” But how much bigger do you want the Times to go on it? Norfolk won British investigative journalism’s two biggest prizes, the Orwell and the Paul Foot. The BBC did court reporting on every single subsequent trial.
Rotherham got far more coverage than, say, John Smyth’s abuse. Even though that just brought down the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Where I do agree with you is that newspapers are often squeamish about graphic details of child rape and …