Continuing with sport for a moment, I watched the footage on Sky (provided by the police via CCTV) of the outbreaks of violence at the West Ham/Millwall fixture played last night. I'm not sure why the footage was offered to Sky at all or why they felt they needed to use it. Sky were covering the game themselves and also offered their pictures and lead with the story on Sky Sports News last night and this morning.
Two issues I thought stood out- the SSN presenters referred to the violent incidents as "shocking"- which I think is hyperbolic and inflammatory in itself and secondly, why were the police offering CCTV footage to Sky anyway? For what purpose was it shown? To add to the shock value, for for the police to say football is heading back to the dark ages (both clubs have historically had hooligan elements and violence of the sort last night was commonplace in the 70's and 80's) is completely over the top.
The assumption that violence is to be expected at football grounds appeared to be the tone of the coverage and of that in tomorrow's press. Football has vastly improved as a safe spectator sport since the days of violence flaring every week. This should be the media angle to take, not violence as a spectator sport bought to you by Sky.
No comments:
Post a Comment