Ken Barlow and The Conservative Media (originally posted May 2013)

pixabay.com

It's local election time, so never a better time than any to talk about about the (increasingly) ugly conservative media and their portrayal of the Bill Roache/Ken Barlow rape allegations. SEE: The Article Here

The fact is, the allegations were just that, and it is very true that it would not have been moral for the article to portray anyone accused of a criminal act as guilty, but the extreme lengths this piece seems to go to in order to sway the viewers as far the other way as they can in order to protest his innocence is unbelievable and needs to be examined.

The way they seem to be portraying Bill solely as a kind old family man with a lovely weather girl girlfriend, making inane excuses just because it happened all those years ago- which is all the more time for an ordeal like that to affect your life, your choices, and your personal security. Are we still living in a world where the words ‘rape allegation'  can be overshadowed by the phrases ‘family man’and ‘a few years ago’?

Yes, yes indeed we are.
The article was contextualised by a photo of the alleged rapist looking like a scared and confused old man on his return from the police station-having ‘suffered the indignity of being DNA tested’; a nice picture of smiling Bill with the Queen; a vogue-type 1970's glamour shot; and an array of photos of Bill being the ‘Twice-married father with love of New Age spirituality’ that he so blatantly is

Erm?

The Daily Mail’s agenda just seemed so blatant to me: take a straight, old, rich white man with a longstanding career (in a soap?) minimize his alleged indiscretions by undermining them by pointing out that it was, in fact, ‘FORTY SIX years ago’, and remind the like-minded readers just how wholesome he is by having a nice little biography at the end.

Question 1: What can be achieved from the view that the seriousness of rape can be undermined by the rapist’s age, social status, sexuality and the time the assault was committed?

Question 2: Who has views like that? And, subsequently

Question 3: What kind of institution employs journalists with views like that?

The Daily Mail is owned by the one of the biggest media conglomerates in Europe, the Daily Mail and General Trust plc (DMGT), who also are associated with: The London Evening Standard, The Metro (no! Not Nemi!), The Mail on Sunday, Ireland on Sunday and The Mail today. DGMT is chaired by The Viscount Rothermere- yes, I know, he does sound like a Disney villain.

And guess who Harold Jonathan Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere- a man with a worth of 1.1bn pounds- supports financially?

David Cameron.

Those 2010 posters of David looking almost as wholesome as the daily mail made Ken Barlow look yesterday were financed partly by Rothermere, partly by other equally wealthy and equally backwards elitists, and how can David not allow their views to be portrayed through the media with a silly thing like PRESS REGULATION if they are the ones who financed him and ultimately won his place in power?

Money in politics will only ever serve old rich white men who see nothing wrong with allegations of child-rape, especially if they were 'FORTY SIX years ago'- which is why this party and all that it stands for should not be in charge of our nation.

tweet me @bakebakebaker

BAKER

xoxoxox

(apologies about this post being weirdly formatted, no idea why hahah)