The Hutton Report in UK Television News
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Justin Schlosberg of entry to the study of conventional media power in the digital age. It has been suggested that in an increasingly multi-platform, 24-hour news landscape, the capacity for elites to con- trol information, determine the news agenda and define the framing of events has waned (McNair 2006). It is also suggested that the digital news landscape presents ever-growing opportunities for grass roots ‘citizen’ journal- ism to influence mainstream output (Thurman 2008). Such views are countered by those who argue that multiplying news outlets have fos- tered, paradoxically, growing homogeneity in content (Boczkowski and de Santos 2007). But it is the relative absence of certain reports from PAPERS Covering the cover-up: the mainstream agenda altogether that pres- ents the most compelling challenge to contem- The Hutton report in porary liberal pluralist accounts. UK television news The controversy over how Dr Kelly died has, however, occasionally and briefly broken main- The Hutton report of 2004 was the outcome of stream media barriers. As such, the case study an inquiry set up to examine ‘the circumstances allows us to assess both how the story was cov- surrounding and leading up to the death of Dr ered, as well as how it was marginalised. The David Kelly’ (Hutton report 2003), a govern- latter question is critical to any attempt at grap- ment intelligence analyst and biological weap- pling with perhaps the most elusive aspect of ons expert. Kelly was the identified source for ideological power: the capacity to define the an allegation made on BBC Radio Four’s Today limits of public debate (Lukes 1997). But in programme that sparked one of the most vocif- researching stories left off the news agenda, a erous and public attacks on the BBC from a sit- requisite challenge is to establish the grounds ting government in its 80-year history. Whilst on which they should have been paid more the report sparked allegations of ‘whitewash’, attention, should such grounds exist. the controversy surrounding Kelly’s actual death was to remain marginalised for the best In other words, how can we be sure that the part of seven years. During this time evidence controversy was intrinsically worthy of greater has accumulated casting increasing doubt over exposure, or that its marginalisation was not the safety of Hutton’s explanation. This paper simply an accidental by-product of randomness presents findings from a study of television in the news selection process? In the analysis news coverage of the controversy between that follows, I attempt to show that margin- 2004 and 2010, based on qualitative and quan- alisation consisted at least partly in journalists’ titative content analysis of news texts. active selection of evidence in favour of the offi- Keywords: Hutton report, television news, cov- cial verdict, over that which undermined it. This er-up, conspiracy theories, propaganda model was given added weight by interview findings which revealed that, overwhelmingly, journal- Introduction ists themselves maintained faith in the official Television news in the UK remains by far the explanation of death, and there is little basis on most trusted and consumed news format – par- which to doubt their sincerity. It was this fact ticularly the public service terrestrial outlets of above all else which accounted for how they BBC and ITN. The failure of these broadcasters regarded the story in terms of news value. to give due attention to conflicting evidence in the case of David Kelly raises important ques- In effect, the newsworthiness of the story was tions concerning the core objectives of the lib- intimately related to whether or not journal- eral democratic project. In particular, to what ists subscribed to the official explanation of extent are the news media able to hold author- death, rather than the controversy’s inherent ity to account when non-media institutions of news value. Much of the following discussion is, accountability fail to do so? therefore, concerned with epistemological con- siderations in attempting to understand why Examining limitations in reporting an appar- the official explanation of death was so believ- ent ‘cover-up’ also presents a useful point able, in spite of existing and growing evidence to the contrary. PAPERS Copyright 2011-3/4. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 8, No 3/4 2011 21 Justin catalyst for this was the failure to find weapons Schlosberg Within the sample population for content anal- of mass destruction (which provided the base ysis, the criteria for selection were reports, stu- justification for war) and the deteriorating dio features or interviews that focused either security situation inside Iraq. Gilligan’s report on the report itself, or on the death of Dr coincided with both and as a result spread like Kelly. The sampling period begins on the day wildfire across the global media. In the words of the report’s publication (28 January 2003) of Alistair Campbell, the government’s chief and continues to the campaigners’ final legal media strategist speaking on BBC’s Newsnight submission to re-open the inquest into Kelly’s on 28 January 2004, ‘this was a story that went death (25 March 2011). Interview respondents right round the world. It was in virtually every were sampled from the full range of journal- newspaper in the world and we were accused ists, news executives and sources who were of being liars’. engaged in the coverage of the report. In line with requests for anonymity, some responses Clearly, the stakes could not have been higher, are unattributed. nor could the controversy have involved more senior and powerful figures within the British Content analysis findings are discussed in rela- state. In light of this, it is perhaps not surprising tion to questions of how the story was both cov- that the actual death of Dr Kelly – sudden and ered and marginalised. Interview findings are unnatural as it was – did not attract the spot- employed as a basis for speculating as to why light of either the Hutton report or subsequent this particular controversy was not afforded the media coverage. Instead, the report served weight of journalistic ‘outrage’ evident in the as a quasi-legal adjudication on the conflict whitewash frame and countless other stories. between the government and the BBC. The evidence points to an ideological rather than organisational filter which warrants fur- In the event, the government was broadly vin- ther research. dicated and the BBC wholly castigated, result- ing in the unprecedented resignation of its An establishment in crisis two most senior figures. This provoked wide- At the heart of the offending report on the spread allegations of ‘whitewash’ in television Today programme at 6.07 am on 29 May 2003 news programmes. But despite this spectacle of was an allegation made by BBC journalist watchdog journalism, the news media widely Andrew Gilligan. In a live ‘two-way’ discussion accepted without question the official primary with the programme’s anchor, he asserted that cause of death, to the neglect of evidence that the government ‘probably knew’ one of the had emerged during the inquiry which severely claims on which it based its case for the invasion undermined it. This included the testimonies of of Iraq earlier in the year was inaccurate. The two paramedics who had examined the body implicit suggestion was that the government and maintained that levels of blood at the scene had lied in order to bolster support for a war were inconsistent with death by arterial bleed- that was by any measure the most unpopular ing. A campaign was subsequently launched since the invasion of Suez in 1956. by a group of senior medical and legal experts who argued that evidence for the accepted The war certainly provoked unprecedented cause of death was unsatisfactory. More impor- public protest and although it was notionally tantly, they argued that the inquiry itself had endorsed by both sides of the House of Com- not properly dealt with the cause of death and mons, leading Labour and Conservative politi- the government’s refusal to hold an inquest or cians detracted; the Liberal Democrat party release medical and police documents was tan- opposed it outright; key Cabinet members tamount to an obstruction of due process. resigned; and officials across the board voiced their discontent through various leaks and What is most pertinent about the controversy anonymous press briefings. In other words, that surrounded the Hutton report was not so the prospect of war drew lines both across and much the ‘original sin’ of corruption (sexing up/ through the British establishment, a situation lying), but corruption of the accountability sys- that was broadly reflected in the pre-war press tem (whitewash/cover-up). This is what distin- (Freedman 2009). guishes coverage of Hutton from that of subse- quent inquiries related to the Iraq War. It is also Although the war itself ushered in a degree partly for this reason that the analysis starts, in of default consensus in media coverage (Lew- a sense, at the end: the Hutton report marked is 2006), the immediate aftermath of regime a culmination of months of media fever over an change saw wholesale fractures re-emerge. The establishment effectively at war with itself. 22 Copyright 2011-3/4. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 8, No 3/4 2011 PAPERS ed to a member of staff.3 That left six clear DNA The basis of cover-up fingerprint marks from unidentified persons. It is important to stress that this study makes The Attorney General makes no mention of this no assessment as to the validity of any positive crucial finding in his report, simply concluding arguments regarding the cause of Dr Kelly’s that he is ‘unable to explain this aspect of the death, nor the wider question of whether it enquiry’.