London Riots 2011

When looking at the Sky News report on the London Riots, an interview is taking place with some teenage gang members whom were involved in the riots. This immediately strikes me as being biased, as the only people being interviewed are those whom set out to steal. Hence, these four individuals are structuring societies viewpoint on the London riots, suggesting that everyone protesting, inevitably ended up causing mass destruction. It should also be noted that the news reporter is a white, middle class male, contrasting against the appearance of the rioters. This therefore represents the presenter as the knowledgeable individual, suggesting that what he is reporting is the correct information due to complete contrasts in appearance.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/dec/05/anger-police-fuelled-riots-study
This article from 'The Guardian', what would be considered to be a reliable source, is just as biased. For instance, the article states that 'the Guardian and The London School of Economics interviewed 270 people who rioted in London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Nottingham, Manchester and Salford'. Although sources where taken from a variety of locations, having only interviewed rioters again, only gives one perspective of the events, suggesting that all the locals were involved in the violence. From the 270 interviewed, the 'typical' stereotyped rioter was labelled. This suggested that the majority of the rioters were young and male, either students or unemployed. Additionally, half of the interviewers were black, with 73% having been stopped by the police in the last 12 months however, these individual didn't class these as 'race riots'. This fits society's stereotypical perception of a criminal. Also when interviewed, rioters confirmed they rioted due to 'opportunism' suggesting a lack of voice, in power and wealth. Hence, it could be said that the riots are down to inequality of income in society.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/12/12/london-riots-2011-alf-biber-tottenham_n_1144040.html
Originally found on Twitter,from the Huffington Post, 'London Riots 2011: Victims Face A Difficult Christmas And An Uncertain Future'. The choice of the word 'victim' is incredibly strong, suggesting the riots resulted in severe effects for the locals. The use of the word, parallels with stories such as the Glasgow Helicopter Crash and the Philippines Typhoon, where innocent civilians lost their lives. Further, 'An Uncertain Future' suggests that the London riots had a permanent effect on the livelihood of the locals however in reality, locals were only affected in the short term with the loss of businesses. When reading the article, the writer has included irrelevant information in order for the public to feel sympathetic for the 'victim' these include lines as such; 'His wife died in 2010' 'Alf Biber grew up half-starved'. This therefore sets an image for all the locals, representing them as innocent and fragile, being unable to defend for themselves against the 'gangs of youths'.

To summarise, all Youtube, The Guardian and Twitter, have been biased on account of the London Riots. This has both been when representing the rioters, suggesting that everyone protesting was inevitably out to cause destruction, but also that of the locals, denoting them as frail and distort victims. This shows how the media exaggerate news stories in order to panic their audience, gaining greater attention from viewers. Hence, the saying is supported;  "If it bleeds, it leads"