Thursday, 8 March 2012

Discredited State Media V Bloggers (protocol 2)

In part two of our exclusive and in-depth interview with the Chairman of chairman's Scrutiny Panel (Parliamentary Select Committee) Deputy Tracey Vallois we discuss the ongoing Leveson Enquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the "accredited" media.

The Deputy concedes that she has "no idea" as to why Bloggers (Jersey's only independent media) are so discriminated against by being excluded from filming Scrutiny Panel Hearings when the disgraced and discredited local State Media (not the Deputy's words) are given carte blanche when it comes to filming even though they breach the protocols and Bloggers NEVER have.

The Leveson Enquiry has taught us that the "accredited" media are not sufficiently regulated and regulatory bodies such as the PCC have proven to be a complete waste of time. Which puts pay to one of the excuses wheeled out by the Establishment when they say Bloggers are not regulated, when in practice they are probably more regulated than the accredited media.

Still Jersey's local State Media who regularly churn out little more than government propaganda, misquote and misrepresent, politicians to suit their own agenda are not held to account and in reality answerable to nobody.

In stark contrast the local Bloggers such as VFC have NEVER been accused of misquoting, misrepresenting, or unfavourably editing to suit our own agenda and have been complimented by just about all of those who we have interviewed, still the State discriminates against us.

Deputy Vallois appears just as disillusioned with the State Media and lack of investigative "journalism" as we are. She too claims to be a victim of Channel Televisions "journalism" and goes onto question why the JEP are patting themselves on the back as if they are some stalwart of journalism because they put in an access to information request!

It is high time Jersey's State Media was investigated for their culture, practices and ethics. Their very uncomfortable and close relationship with politicians and the like. Which, as discussed in this interview, was a recommendation put forward by the Scrutiny Sub Panel chaired by Deputy Trevor Pitman that will no doubt gather dust just like the vast majority of Scrutiny recommendations that might hold the true power of this island to account.

VFC has never been accused of the unethical practices employed by the accredited media and deserve, at the very least, a level playing field. Indeed the local State Media should be looking to raise their standards to that of the majority of local Bloggers.

Again we thank Deputy Vallois for her support of Bloggers and for this full and frank interview.

Part one of this interview can be viewed HERE

36 comments:

  1. What was I saying about the Press Complaints Commission (PCC)? Ah yeah I remember.

    "The Leveson Enquiry has taught us that the "accredited" media are not sufficiently regulated and regulatory bodies such as the PCC have proven to be a complete waste of time."

    I REST MY CASE

    ReplyDelete
  2. In the light of the latest development concerning the demise of the PCC, it is clearly more vital than ever that our government should commission a review of our local media's performance.

    It would seem that Deputy Vallois, as Chairman of the Chairmen's Committee, might well agree with this. Her problem is that she feels that it might be outside the remit of Scrutiny. We should find out if this is the case. If so, this is surely something that our government might find a way around. After all, we can spend millions on abortive attempts to find Graham Power guilty of something - or anything at all!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just a couple of snippets that should demonstrate the disgraceful reporting by the local State Media as concluded in the Report submitted by the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Sub Panel chaired by Deputy Trevor Pitman.

    Press Coverage of BDO Alto report

    • The publication of the BDO Alto and Wiltshire reports by the Minister for Home Affairs on 14th July 2010 was an occasion for highly critical attention on Mr. Harper. The Jersey Evening Post published an extensive six page report with headlines focussed on:
    • Celebrity lifestyle of Lenny Harper and his officers
    • Meals in top-class restaurants and first class travel at expense of tax payers
    • £42,000 – the overtime paid to a single officer in the first 15 months of the historical abuse enquiry
    • No dog’s life for handler with luxury hotel lifestyle
    • Hot on the trail of top London restaurants
    • Lenny Harper and his team enjoyed £90-a-head meals and travelled first class at taxpayers’ expense, an accountants’ report revealed
    • Off to Scotland Yard again
    • First class on the Gatwick Express
    • The problem with the way the official review was reported is that it appears to take every opportunity to discredit, with the benefit of hindsight, those in charge of Operation Rectangle without any reference to the constraints and pressures under which the Police were operating during the early stages of the investigation. The emphasis on alleged misuse of taxpayers’ money risks implanting the impression in the public mind that the entire expenditure on Operation Rectangle was badly managed.


    • In contrast, the BDO Alto report notes:
    In undertaking this Review and throughout the preparation of this Report we have been conscious of the fact that detailed scrutiny of any major inquiry will reveal errors, omissions and learning opportunities, particularly given the benefit of hindsight. It has not been our intention to be ultra-critical in our conclusions and we have attempted to be fair to all of those involved.
    • Mr. Kellett as previously mentioned made a point of qualifying the critical attention in the report with praise for the dedication and determination which police officers brought to the task of investigating child abuse:
    We have no doubt that Mr Harper was totally dedicated to the task of investigating serious crimes that had possibly occurred at Haut de la Garenne and that he was entirely sincere in his belief that child abuse there and elsewhere in Jersey was a major issue that needed to be dealt with. Throughout the period that Operation Rectangle was live, he and his staff displayed great dedication and did their utmost to bring suspected offenders to justice and we pointed out as much in our report. However, we were not asked to examine motivation and dedication but rather to look at how the resources available to the investigation were managed. We did so and made nineteen recommendations. Inevitably, because of the central role Mr Harper performed, his management of the resources formed a central part of our examination but to the extent that any of those recommendations constitute criticism of his actions, no criticism of, let alone attack on, the existence of the investigation or of the motivation for it is intended or implied.

    • No such qualification appears in the above press report.
    Furthermore, the newspaper did not pick up on the fact that Mr. Harper had not been interviewed or given the opportunity to respond to the criticisms in the report. Nor, as far as we are aware, did the newspaper give Mr. Harper any opportunity to state his own perspective.

    A damming indictment on the State Media, but there is much more and should be read HERE

    (Part 1)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Part 2.

    • Our primary concern about the premature leaking of details of the review of financial management relates to issues of fairness in the way these leaks are reported in the media without an adequate opportunity for an alternative perspective to be considered.
    • It is clear that the premature leaking to a national newspaper of draft sections intended for incorporation in the BDO Alto report was intended to cast a negative

    perspective on the police handling of Operation Rectangle. We have been unable to question Mr. Gradwell about his reasons for doing so, as he refused an invitation to attend a hearing with the Sub-Panel as a witness. Whatever his motivation, the effect of his actions was to undermine confidence in the handling of the HCA enquiry by his predecessors.
    • Two programmes broadcast by Channel Television in September 2009 had a similar impact locally. Channel Television also appears to have had access through Mr. Gradwell to significant details from the BDO Alto review prior to the publication of its report, referring to dinners in specific London restaurants, overnight stays for one hour meetings and the failure to appoint a finance manager.
    • These programmes were based on interviews with Mr. Gradwell, shortly before his departure from the States of Jersey Police, giving him the opportunity to paint a very negative picture of the way the Police investigation was led.
    • We are not aware that Channel Television made any attempt to contact Mr. Harper to gain an alternative perspective on the enquiry.
    In our hearing with him on 25th August 2011, the Minister was sympathetic to our concerns about the way negative messages about Mr. Power and Mr Harper had been spun in the media and he offered to make a joint statement to this effect with the Sub-Panel. We believe that this would be a positive step.(END)

    And these shower are held in a higher regard than Bloggers (Jersey's only independent media)?

    It's about time the State Media were investigated.

    ReplyDelete
  5. A nice picture of the very attractive young Deputy but I wouldn't swap her for the likes of Trevor 'The Bald Truth' Pitman in a million years. She has gone over to the Dark Side and Alan Breckon must be very disappointed. We need doers in the States not eye candy and slackers or people who support secrecy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. In fairness Deputy Vallois wasn’t there for the draconian vote on banning Bloggers (Jersey’s only independent media) from filming Scrutiny Panel Hearings. She is giving us an opportunity to submit oral evidence at their next hearing. She was the only Panel Chairman who agreed to an interview. She appears just as disillusioned with the State Media as the rest of us and is keeping the protocol under review. She is one of the younger States Members who sees the influence and potential of Social Media. That’s not to say ALL of her older colleagues don’t but certainly the majority of them. If anybody should have been giving us an interview it should have been Deputy Kristina Moore for, along with her previous employers, the discredited and disgraced CTV were the ones who blatantly breached the protocol. Unfortunately Deputy Moore didn’t even have the courtesy to acknowledge our e-mail let alone give us an interview.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Regardless of her political views, this Deputy Vallois is young enough to have no doubt about internet media being the chief information source in the future.

    Some of the unfair dismissal of citizen media in Jersey is surely entirely political, but it will become increasingly impossible for such a corrupt government to dismiss blogs like yours. Our best guess is they are only pretending to ignore you, but anyone with power to lose would consider you dangerous.

    To retrieve information on a chosen news topic, most adults under the age of, say 60, and nearly all teenagers, use Google or similar search, which brings them to awareness of alternative information sources online. You can't be lost to the larger world, and you (and they) well know you have a strong and growing international readership base.

    Just as State Media have been forced to rely on the internet presence to stay competitive, and for nearly all of their own information gathering, they are increasingly forced into blogging and tweeting to remain passably relevant.

    There is not a chance in h*** that citizen media can be banned or ignored in the long run in Jersey. You can take heart from how independent online journalists are rapidly winning the larger war on State Media everywhere, with exceptions being limited to a few places like North Korea.

    These attempts by frightened local feudalists to side-line you are but one tiny skirmish they delude themselves into thinking they can win.

    Specific influential political journalism blogs quickly become "must reads" in other parts of the world for anyone who understands that knowledge is power.

    Given that blogs like yours present the only factual evidence pertaining to the most significant political struggles in Jersey, you already have enormous influence which you simply cannot lose unless you stop blogging. No one in Jersey can make up enough media rules to truly marginalize you in time to defeat your exposure of evidenced facts. Do they honestly believe denying you permission for an official filming presence will protect them much?

    No. They are just fighting a losing battle for the absolute control of information even as internet communication independence now belongs to a wired and borderless world.

    You win.

    Denver Gals

    ReplyDelete
  8. If you bloggers are so sure of yourselves then why aren't any of you registered and committed to Data Protection?

    ReplyDelete
  9. A typical Trolling comment. We have demonstrated the inadequacies and appalling reporting of our State Media. We have demonstrated that the Press Complaints Commission is a waste of time. We have demonstrated that the draconian protocols are a complete waste of time and can be breached, at will, by the State Media and the Scrutiny Panel Chairmen.

    We then get a comment about Data Protection, not only that, the commenter claims to know that not “ANY” Blogger is registered with them……..priceless!

    ReplyDelete
  10. There is nothing ‘priceless’ about this question and there is nothing trolling about it either. Data Protection have been asked whether any of your blogs are registered with them and they are not. Now that either means you are too frightened to register with Data Protection or you think the law is not applicable to you. Whatever your reasons, don’t expect everyone to take your collection of blogs seriously if you refuse to commit to the law unlike the accredited media you are always so fast to have a go at.

    ReplyDelete
  11. If we were registered with Data Protection would that mean that we could steal work colleagues personal e-mails, share them with others where they get published on the internet, and not be prosecuted for data theft and have the incident dismissed as “regulatory”?

    Furthermore you say “or you think the law is not applicable to you.”

    We have shown that the law is more applicable to Bloggers than it is to State Media or certain States Members.

    ReplyDelete
  12. No excuses.

    You are either committed or you are not, and you are not.

    ReplyDelete
  13. You never answered the question.

    “If we were registered with Data Protection would that mean that we could steal work colleagues personal e-mails, share them with others where they get published on the internet, and not be prosecuted for data theft and have the incident dismissed as “regulatory”?”

    ReplyDelete
  14. VFC, this thread has nothing to do with data protection but everything to do with the state media ignoring protocols and misleading the public but still given preferential treatment over the far superior bloggers. Why the troll wants to divert the subject away is something only a troll would know.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Indeed, which is why I said at the start that it was a typical Troll comment. They have since left another one that is completely devoid of logic and ignores just about everything that was said in the interview and subsequent comments so won’t be getting published. It was probably a mistake publishing their first comment as experience has shown they see it as an “entrance fee” and I then get bombarded with nonsensical dribble so back to zero tolerance.

    The Blog posting is about the double standards of the Scrutiny Panel, their discriminatory protocol and the disgraceful practices of the discredited and disgraced State Media.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ian was arrested today allegedly for contempt of court re, recording in court a while ago

    what don't they want the people to hear

    cyril

    ReplyDelete
  17. Cyril.

    Could you e-mail me? voiceforchildren@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  18. Re "If you bloggers are so sure of yourselves then why aren't any of you registered and committed to Data Protection?"

    Study the law. Bloggers don't have to be registered - they are not 'data controllers' as defined by the act in any way at all.

    All you want to do is subject free speech to state control. 'They don't like it up 'em, Captain Mannering.'

    ReplyDelete
  19. Re: The Data Protection comment.

    Perhaps the troll is too ignorant to know that Blogger's servers (Google's) aren't located here!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Deputy Montfort Tadier's latest Blog Posting on CHILD ABUSE

    ReplyDelete
  21. Re: The Data Protection comment.

    Perhaps the troll is too ignorant to know that Blogger's servers (Google's) aren't located here!

    Yes somebody recently used that as a defence didn't they but still got charged.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "The attempts to divert this debate into discussions concerning the trivia of expense claims, is a scandal of which all involved should be thoroughly ashamed." Graham Power QPM.

    Then look at what the STATE MEDIA DID

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Yes somebody recently used that as a defence didn't they but still got charged"


    Perhaps the troll believes that those who charge people are always correct in their view of what the law is.

    ReplyDelete
  24. hi there im looking for steve longstaf is he still posting here
    alfie

    ReplyDelete
  25. Cyril, any further news on Ian?

    ReplyDelete
  26. So here is the dilemma. If you were the accredited media how would you report on Mike Tyson's visit to Jersey?
    Is he an ex boxer, an ex wife beater or an ex rapist - or just another muslim vegan with a large family?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Tom Gruchy.

    Just when you would think that the discredited and disgraced BBC could not discredit and disgrace themselves any further, they come up trumps again.

    Yesterday Chris Stone said that the BBC were not "promoting" Mike Tyson. He said that one of his (Mike Tyson's) team had been interviewed, the member of the team was the "promoter." Not only that, they were playing the Rocky theme tune during the interview and telling the listeners they would be able to purchase Tyson memorabilia at the event.........that they weren't advertising!

    State Media at its best, could the BBC sink any lower?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Can I just say that I think this blog is excellent.

    The only place we can get the real facts these days are from the likes of you, Rico Sorda, Tom Gruchy and a few politicians like Deputies Pitman and Tadier. More power to your elbows all of you.

    The council of ministers must go. We got rid of the useless Ben Shenton, Jimmy Pechard and Terry Le Main so keep your chins up.

    Truth will out in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Alan, Ben Shenton and Jimmy Perchard stood down from politics and Terry Le Main had just lost his seat. Translate that as you want but you could also say the same for Bob Hill, Daniel Wimberley and Debbie De Sousa if you find it necessary to rub all these peoples noses in it.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hi VFC
    sorry to be off topic
    an update on Ians' arrest

    Ian was arrested at about 3:20pm yesterday for suspicion of contempt of court, just as he finished a job

    He was released at 9:20 ish the same day, without charge

    whilst in custody at PHQ the police searched his home and took his computers,some discs,external hard drive, phones and paperwork etc.

    was this lawful? can any evidence gathered in this way be admissible
    in court? well this is Jersey!

    Ian says, to be fair to the Police they were polite and non aggressive and Ian thanks them for that.

    Interestingly the Police confirmed that contempt of court is a common law crime, it is a crime solely of the common law, and like the crime of murder you wont find these crimes in statutory law (think about that).

    so contempt of court is for common law jurisdiction only, B. Shaw by refusing to confirm that she was operating under her common law oath of office was definitely not operating in common law,she was operating in an administrative capacity.

    this begs the question;can a common law order have any authority when issued by an administrative court?

    Ian announced to Shaw that he was recording in court, so, why wasn't he stopped or charged with contempt of court there and then?

    no, one month (and several blog postings) later he is arrested.
    Ian believes(I agree) that this was another fishing expedition,
    he is obviously hitting a nerve and the PTB don't like it up em!

    Ian now has no phone (essential for his work)how long does it take to record the info on a phone?
    Is this just another way of putting pressure on someone?

    as an aside I wonder why I haven't been arrested for recording Richard Falle in court?

    will keep you updated

    cyril

    ReplyDelete
  31. Cyril.

    Thanks for the update. As we know the Jersey courts can do what the hell they please and being in the right counts for nothing in Jersey. Keep us posted?

    ReplyDelete
  32. It is a fishing trip but they are entitled to do this under law.
    He will probably be charged after they have gone through all his computer equipment and phone records etc to see if there is anything they can add to his charge sheet. That is the way they work I am afraid and they will go through everything.

    ReplyDelete
  33. anonymous

    Shenton and Perchard both knew they were going to lose their seats - just like Le Main did - because they had done nothing at all to help the Island's working people.

    All they did was try to undermine a child abuse investigation and cuddle up to the ministers kissing the backsides of the rich. Good ridence to them.

    I hadn't laughed so much as when Le Main was booted out here in St. Helier No 2 for twenty years.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Alan Marriot/Kaz.

    Admin are you sure its not the same people writing guff on here but from made up names?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Cyril. The Police do not charge people, the Centeniers do, and if Ian is charged, he will be asked to attend the Station at a mutual time in which a Centenier is present that would not normally be 9.20 p.m. at night but more like around teatime. All the Police do is arrest people and attempt to stitch them up.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous

    How dare you try and suggest that I am not a real person. Just because people don't all follow the nonsense that you seem to write doesn't mean their opinins are worth less.

    This site has a very good name for vetting comments and just as well.

    We don't want one of the few sites where you can be sure of getting quality information to go the way of Channel TV will aall their troll comments pretending to be progressives, do we.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.