Jason Arday got his job because of the colour of skin, unlike me who got my job because my dad is a Viscount/CEO of a super market/Mates with the owner of a news network/In the Epstein Files.
Signed, just about every Journalist in the UK.
i can only imagine that reform’s definition of ‘severe disabilities’ will exclude debilitating chronic illnesses, many of which don’t have a cure. so those living with what is essentially a life sentence of illness, both physically & financially, won’t be able to survive anymore.
Journalists: Let us not throw the baby out with the bath water. What happened to Arday was sad, but do not attack the valiant fighting forces of Fleet Street! Scrutiny is a virtue.
Public: Okay, can we scrutinise your conduct on this issue?
Journalists: No.
The Times and The Sunday Times published about 44 articles about Professor Jason Arday.
The Telegraph published 43.
The Daily Mail published about 38.
The Independent published 24.
The Spectator published around 21.
The Guardian published about 19.
The Daily Express published more than 10.
The Sun published 9.
It was a disproportionate media pile-on.
The term “witch hunt” is overused in politics. Perhaps not this time. Quite a bit of the British media should ask themselves some serious questions as to whether the tenor and volume of the coverage they gave to this man was remotely proportionate. Likewise there are questions for Cambridge- and whether they discharged their duty of care.