Before we start; it has to be stressed (while it's still semi legal) that this Blog Posting is an "opinion" from a member of the public and Social Media/mainstream media contributor. It is difficult knowing where to start with this posting/opinion. We could start with that first we had the brother as BORIS BAILHACHE and now we've got Donald Bailhache.
Jersey's unelected and unaccountable Bailiff William Bailhache has reportedly used his speech (17th September 2018 at Assize D’Heritage in the Royal Court) to attack the mainstream media and Social Media. He has attacked free speech and this is yet another reason why the outdated and out of touch (with the modern digital era) position of Bailiff should be consigned to history.
If what has been reported is correct then one can only assume that the Bailiff's speech was written by Donald Trump. According to the BBC:
"Jersey's Bailiff has described irresponsible reporting in the media as a threat to the rule of law.
In a speech to lawyers at the start of the legal year, Sir William Bailhache said that unregulated social media allowed uninformed opinions to be given free rein - even if they aren't based on fact.
He said that could be damaging to the respect people have for the government and the legal process.
And he said a further danger was that mainstream media would try to keep up with social media by putting forward people's opinions as news.
He asked news organisations to keep their output free from uninformed gossip or chatter."
As we said where does one start with this? Let's start with the
"A threat to the rule of law." Exactly what "rule of law" is he talking about? The rule of law that has political dissidents imprisoned or bankrupted? The rule of law that has an opposition politician's place of residence turned over by a 10 strong police unit without a search warrant? A (possibly illegal) suspension of a Chief Police Officer whose force was investigating DECADES of covered up Child Abuse? An (unaccountable) Attorney General's Office who won't prosecute powerful alleged Child Abusers, paedophiles and rapists? The list could go on, and on, but for brevity let's leave it there and perhaps readers would have other examples.
"unregulated social media allowed uninformed opinions to be given free rein - even if they aren't based on fact."
I mean what the flick??? People have opinions, "based on fact" or otherwise, and what, they shouldn't be allowed to share them??? Words do actually fail me here because I don't think I have come across anything so ridiculous in my life.
"could be damaging to the respect people have for the government and the legal process."
Really? exactly what "respect" is he talking about? The last social survey which asked the question(s) reported (if memory serves correct and stand to be corrected) 75% of those surveyed had no confidence in the government and 50% had no confidence in our so-called "justice" system. What kind of respect does he believe the State has? He should probably read more social Media, and indeed comments (from the public who shouldn't have an opinion aired) on MSM online articles. Here is an example of Jersey's "JUSTICE" SYSTEM.
"mainstream media would try to keep up with social media by putting forward people's opinions as news."
I've got breaking news for the Bailiff. It is the mainstream media's job to be a voice of/for the public. It is not there to be (or shouldn't be) a mouthpiece for the government, nor unelected, unaccountable, outdated Bailiffs/Crown Officers. To quote George Orwell:
“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.” The Bailiffs and all Crown Officers should learn that in the new digital era people are able to be held to account like never before. Being held to account is an alien concept to Crown Officers and rather than attempting to legislate against free speech they should get with the times and embrace a new, open, digital world. Take onboard the criticisms and adapt accordingly rather than employing "The Jersey Way" tactic of oppression and Kangaroo (secret) Courts to silence critics. Why not work with the critics in order to win over the public's trust and confidence?