Death sentences
Raymond Snoddy looks at how the media reacted to the grim news that more than 100,000 Covid-related deaths have now been recorded in the UK
On Sunday, 24 May last year, the New York Times produced a remarkable front page. The old grey lady was particularly grey on that occasion.
To mark the fact that, in America Covid-19 deaths were about to hit the 100,000 mark, the paper filled its front page with as many names of the dead as it could fit in, with the help of a tight typeface.
It was an important, symbolic gesture – even though it would be one that would be difficult to replicate, given that the death toll has now hit 425,000 and rising.
Did the UK media rise to the occasion when those who died within 28 days of testing for Covid-19 pass the 100,000 mark in this country?
Up to a point, Lord Copper.
It was always going to be a day for reflection, whether you happen to be an archbishop or not.
It was still a little bizarre for Prime Minister, Boris Johnson to call a Downing Street press conference with no news other than the fact that the latest death toll had reached 100,000, as they knew it surely would sometime this week.
Still, it was an opportunity for Johnson to say he was “deeply sorry for every life lost” and to say he took responsibility as Prime Minister for everything that had happened, without going into any detail on what precisely he was taking responsible for.
Then Johnson got to the point of the exercise when, with downcast eyes and furrowed brow, he said: “We truly did everything we could, and continue to do everything that we can, to minimise loss of life and to minimise suffering.”
We will never know how sincere Johnson’s sorrow really is, other than the sorry of being “responsible” for the highest number of deaths in Europe.
Depending on how you do the counting, the Prime Minister has also presided over the highest, or near highest, death rate per million in the world.
That sentence, “we truly did everything we could and continue to do everything we can” deserves further thought.
Pass for the moment on whether it is even remotely true, there is the whiff of artifice about it whether generated by Johnson himself, or more likely his PR machine.
Whatever the motives, the ploy worked spectacularly well. Almost all the national press, breaking predictably along political lines, either acquiesced or took the bait.
[advert position=”left”]
The sorry and suffering of poor Boris and his bowed head dominated the front pages and deflected attention from the real story, that terrible number -100,162 – which is actually an underestimate. In the early days there was so little testing that many Covid deaths went unassigned and the true excess death figure is probably closer to 120,000.
The i stayed focussed, as did The Times, which ran a black and white front page “100,000 Deaths” and below the pictures of 25 of those who have died.
The Times intro was still a little odd with the claim that Boris Johnson had “apologised” to the nation. Surely it was more of a… sorry if I had caused offence … sort of apology.
Even The Guardian was caught in two minds between the deaths and the PM’s deep sorry.
The leader columns of The Sun and the Daily Mail were characteristically revealing – both were more interested in Brexit battles and attacking the “Euro Mafia” and the “EU bullies” trying to nick our jabs.
Much further down, the Mail did concede that “in hindsight, the Government and its top scientists and medics were all too slow to approve more drastic action a year ago.”
Really? All of them?
The recollections that many scientists advocated tougher, or that the Daily Mail was a cheerleader throughout for those opposing more drastic action, must be mistaken.
The right-wing press were also big supporters of the Barrington declaration, which implausibly argued that all you had to do was protect the vulnerable and let the virus rip, ignoring long Covid and the dangers posed by new strains.
The broadcasters did a little better.
Channel 4 News interviewed an undertaker – usually a missing piece from the story – and the Today programme ended by reading names of the dead right up to fading out before the 9 AM pips.
As the 100,000 total was approaching and the UK took on the mantle of the highest death rate in the world, journalists have belatedly upped their game and started asking just how such a thing could have happened and who is responsible.
In reply, ministers come up with a cocktail that combines the fact that we are all too old and fat, combined with the supposed unpredictability of mutating viruses.
The media as a whole could have done better in a number of crucial ways.
There was a failure until recently to show the reality of such a large number of deaths. Funeral corteges and crowded mortuaries were fine in Italy and America but not in Britain.
The NHS and local authorities may however have been culpable in denying access, until recently.
Newsnight’s Mark Urban tried to do a piece on volunteers manning mortuaries during the first wave but was blocked.
The BBC’s home editor, Mark Easton finally got access earlier this month to emergency mortuaries but a lot of negotiation was involved.
Showing the reality of the dead and dying is not voyeurism but an essential piece of public education for those whose lives have been untouched by the pandemic, or think it’s fine to go to illicit raves.
Newspapers should be campaigning for an immediate interim inquiry by a small number of independent specialists.
The aim would not be to assign blame at this stage but to identify where mistakes were made in order to avoid repeating them.
The danger is always that journalists get too caught up in the daily breaking news. That’s no way to cover a pandemic.
They must redouble their efforts to find the answer to the big question that the Government declines to answer – how on the earth did the UK come to have the highest number of deaths in Europe and probably the highest death rate in the world?
Saying we did “all we could” is not an adequate answer.
It’s late but not too late to avoid further mistakes.
Realistic forecasts warn there could be another 40,000 to 50,000 deaths in the UK before the vaccinations catch up.
As for the New York Times, the paper will have to find a way of marking 500,000 deaths in the U.S before the summer is out.