Three sub-headings followed the controversial headline, consisting of: "some fans picked pockets of victims", "some fans urinated on the brave cops" and "some fans beat up PC giving kiss of life". The newspaper stated that information of Liverpool fans' supposed behaviour was fed to them by police inspector Gordon Sykes, in which he stated that Liverpool fans had pickpocketed the dead — in addition to other accusations by unnamed police officers as well as Conservative MP Irvine Patnick.
The Sun's story then went on to state that "drunken Liverpool fans viciously attacked rescue workers as they tried to revive victims" and "police officers, firemen and ambulance crew were punched, kicked and urinated upon". The Sun's media coverage of the disaster led for a large majority in the city of Liverpool to boycott the newspaper, and sales dipped following and have not recovered since.
It is boycotted not just by Liverpool fans, but Everton supporters as well, and those who generally have an affiliation to the city and football club.
The Taylor Report concluded that all accusations of drunkenness and violent behaviour from Liverpool fans were unfounded, stating that most fans were: "not drunk, nor even the worse for drink". Liverpool FC banned journalists from The Sun from entering Anfield for press coverage in , denying them access to matches and press conferences. Everton followed a few months later with Goodison Park. In , 15 years after the disaster, The Sun published the following official statement: "Our carelessness and thoughtlessness following that blackest of days made the grief of their families and friends even harder to bear.
We gladly say sorry again today: fully, openly, honestly and without reservation. Kelvin MacKenzie, editor of the Sun during the Hillsborough coverage, apologised in for his actions, but ultimately put the blame on the misleading information he received from the Tory MP: "I regret Hillsborough. Dalglish responded: "You know that big headline, 'The Truth'? All you have to do is put 'We lied' in the same size.
Then you might be alright. As Peter Carney puts it when we sit down for a cup of tea, " The Sun didn't just sow the seeds [with the front page], they picked the fruit from that powerful tree and fed their family with it. When the HJC was formed in , the boycott — which had previously evolved organically — was mobilised in what some refer to as part of the "street battle" for justice.
The boycott was visualised with stickers, posters and other merchandise giving the boycott and battle for justice a now iconic face and utilising the match day crowd to spread the message. As always, the boycott came second to the ongoing legal and political battle for truth and justice, helping to raise awareness, resources and support. Those who weren't in Liverpool took the boycott with them.
If you ask Peter Hooton, the lead singer of Liverpool's The Farm, if he has ever come into contact with The Sun , he will admit he has the once, but not on purpose. During the height of The Farm's success they found themselves hanging out with Madness at a Capital Radio stock car racing day in London. In front of them, in a car and helmet both emblazoned with The Sun 's logo, was the newspaper's then-Bizarre editor, Piers Morgan.
What should we do? He was screaming. We could've done society a great favour there, but we had a moment of panic and thought, 'Oh my god, this could explode and we could be charged for manslaughter or something. That's the way they were trying to contrive stories at the time. Peter adds that if the incident had happened today he would have been castigated on social media, such is the weight given to the boycott. After discussions with those involved in the HJC, organisers decided that the larger issue of injustice should be the focal point and the name was changed.
The highlight of the concert was Mick Jones playing Clash songs, something he rarely did. And we're taking this on the road. There are a number of flaws in this theory. The customer base has been almost wiped out in this part of the north-west. On the face of it, this backs up the argument. The reality is different. There are a number of problems with this. In the s, Liverpool struggled with serious social and economic issues. When the UK became part of Europe in , it hastened the decline of the docks on the Mersey.
In Liverpool unemployment rose, factories relocated and trade went elsewhere. There was a deep-seated suspicion that being part of Europe led to jobs leaving the city. The English nationalism and anti-immigrant feeling that has underpinned the Brexit debate was completely absent. Liverpool is a city built on waves of inward migration. The mood was not anti-European, it was anti-unemployment. The pre-Hillsborough resentment was largely towards Westminster, something the study does not reflect.
Another thing the authors have not taken into account is that Liverpool has been out of step with the mainstream political thinking of the nation for a century and a half. No wonder there was some opposition beside the Mersey. In the s the mood changed but not because of the boycott.
0コメント