Letter from the i editor: Bursting with opinions and questions
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.So, judging by i’s bulging weekend mailbox, it’s safe to say that you are back from your holidays, fit to burst with opinions and questions.
One question answered today is that in Cooper Brown’s place we have a line-up of sparkling columnists from our senior editing team. They’ll tackle consumerism, politics, family life, foreign affairs and society. The columns are called Freeview, to make clear these are their individual opinions, not i leaders in disguise.
A question many of you asked was why i, like other papers, pixellated the face of the young man running with the knife in that stunning photograph from the Notting Hill Carnival, taken moments after a man (in shot) had been stabbed and as a passer-by tried to trip up the running youth. One reader even asked how I could sleep at night for not aiding the police in identifying a suspect? The point is that, in cases like this, the testimony of eyewitnesses who have identified a defendant as the person they saw commit the crime is likely to be tainted by the fact that they have seen his face in the media and could be said to have picked him out at an ID parade on the basis of that knowledge, rather than their actual recollection of the event. Editors have been convicted of contempt of court (an extremely serious criminal offence) for precisely this.
We did not know if the youth in the picture was one of those arrested, so could not know if there was any countervailing argument in identifying him to help the police catch him. So, we pixellated his face. In the early hours Scotland Yard asked that media remove pixellation as it had not arrested him. The Yard later said it had the youth so the face should not be shown any longer as it may prejudice his trial. Anyway, he is 16, a juvenile, and should not have been identified. I hope that helps.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
0Comments