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.Most births do not make the BBC’s main news bulletin or the front pages of the papers. I had a son two weeks ago and this will be the only mention of him – until he becomes England cricket captain in 2040.
A royal baby, however, is a different kettle of fish altogether. The arrival of a princess on Saturday was greeted with cheers from the crowds outside St Mary’s Hospital in London and banner headlines from the press pack.
The Independent has historically been largely uninterested in the shenanigans of the monarch and her family. Its editorial position has tended towards a desire for a much more modern style of monarchy – and only the most significant of royal stories are likely to make the cut.
For some readers, this is an important matter of principle, not necessarily because of anti-royal feeling per se, but on the basis that there are usually more important things going on in the world. Sure enough, a complaint arrived on Saturday morning from a reader who was dismayed that a report of the royal labour was the top item on The Independent’s website.
There are two issues here. First, is it unethical to give overriding prominence to a story that, for many, is anodyne at best, especially when set against a general election and the aftermath of Nepal’s disatrous earthquake? No doubt some might find the decision distasteful but it is hardly immoral to highlight – for a limited time – a parochial breaking story, even if it is not as significant as other global matters.
This takes us into the second point, which is why The Independent website’s approach to the story might be different from The Independent print edition, where news of a royal birth would never get top billing. They are, of course, fundamentally different beasts, each with their own editor and teams. While editorial values are shared in most key ways, the newspaper and the website target different audiences. The online readership is global after all, and many users arrive at the site via internet searches.
Moreover, websites change by the minute. A story which is top dog at 10 o’clock in the morning may well have slipped down the homepage by midday. Regular visitors expect frequent updates. The paper, by contrast, provides a once-a-day commentary on the key stories of the last 24 hours – and has only limited space to play with.
Whether the fourth in line to the throne will trouble the headline writers again for a while remains to be seen. But when Tristan James Gore smashes the Aussies all round Lord’s in about 25 years’ time, just remember that you read his name first here: and nowhere else.
Boxing, money, and ethics
The other news to have dominated the weekend was an organised fight by two very tough and very wealthy men. In the grand scheme of things, it was about as important as the birth of a child who will almost certainly never be queen.
Debates about the ethical rights and wrongs of boxing are unending – and the media generally gives them a decent airing, while at the same time reporting on bouts which, though detested by some, are enthralling to others.
What placed the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight in its own category of distinction was the money involved, with Mayweather apparently presented with a cheque for $100m (£66m) after his victory. Even for a fight between two greats, such a purse would not be possible if it were not for the wonders of pay-per-view TV.
In the past, concerns about boxing related to the nature of the sport. On this occasion, its most dubious feature was its financial muscle. What could earthquake-effected Nepal do with $100m? Maybe US networks HBO and Showtime could provide an answer to that.
Twitter: @willjgore
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments