By Jordan McSweeney
On the 7th of March 2016, police responded to a shooting at the Inline National Signage and Property Services building, where one person died and two were injured. After hours of negotiation, police entered the building, where they found the shooter dead from a self-inflicted gun wound.
“For hundreds of years, news publishers have had news platforms” (Carroll, 2015), and in this blog entry, the media coverage of the shooting will be analysed across four of the most popular news platforms right now – social media, television, online news and radio.
Timeline of Events
11:23am – Nine News Sydney confirm on Twitter that three people have been shot in a building at Ingleburn.
11:45am – 7 News confirm the shooter is still active and that one person has died and two have been wounded.
2:35pm – 7 News broadcast a press conference with Detective Inspector Mark Brett, who confirms that negotiations with the shooter are at a delicate stage and that the deceased victim was 43 years old.
2:35pm – The Australian publishes online that “the incident is not terrorism related” (Khalik, 2016) and provides details on where the wounded victims had been shot.
4:45pm – The Sydney Morning Herald publishes online that the deceased victim is under a sheet on the kerb, the gunman is still active, nearby businesses remain open and the area is virtually abandoned (Layt, Levy, O’Sullivan, Olding, Ralston, 2016).
6:24pm – 7 News Sydney confirms on Twitter the gunman’s identity and death.
The next day – An eyewitness named Kevin tells Triple M’s The Grill Team about the actions of police officers and what was going through his mind during the siege.
Similarities and differences across platforms.
Timeliness – Nine News Sydney broke the news on Twitter first, not only because it’s an instant medium but because people “turn to their mobile phones for the latest news happenings” (McCluskey, 2014). Soon after, television stations and online news websites began their coverage of the event. Radio’s coverage of the siege was slower than the other news platforms, however, as the incident began when most people were at work and ended when most people had already arrived home. Therefore, coverage was predominantly broadcasted the next morning and afternoon, as more people would hear it.
Angle of the stories – Each news platform used similar angles when reporting on the siege. The tweets focused on the damage caused by the shootings while the television news packages concentrated on the activity of the shooter and the well-being of the victims. The online news articles utilised similar angles, but delved more into the siege’s wide-reaching impacts, specifically on businesses and a possible terrorism connection. Radio broadcasts reported on the event in the same way, but had a more commiserative angle than the other platforms, as sympathy is often needed to obtain answers from people upset about a crime (Ingram, 2008).
News values – The four news platforms all reported on the story in a similar matter but each emphasised various news values while doing so. The tweets, posted by Sydney-based accounts, used proximity by pointing out how the siege was happening in one of the city’s suburbs. Meanwhile, the television news reports made a point of the police’s conflict with the gunman and how they were two sides locked in a battle. The Grill Team’s interview with Kevin, however, played up the human interest side of the events more, and highlighted how the predicament the eyewitness found himself in was unusual. As for the online news articles, they dwelled more on the event’s impact on local residents and workers.
Comprehensiveness of the stories – The original tweet that broke the story managed to cover the “who”, “what”, “where”, “when” and “how” of the story but not the “why”. More information emerged on the “why” as TV stations and online news publications got ahold of the incident and reported on any updates. The news platform that provided the most details was online news, specifically the Sydney Morning Herald‘s article “Sydney shooting: Police, ambulances rush to multiple shooting at Ingleburn”. By the next day, thanks to the combined efforts of the news platforms, the public knew the complete story.
Fairness and balance – The news platforms all reported on the incident in a fair and balanced manner. The tweets were accurate and truthful, and did not contain a slant of any kind. The news reports didn’t feature any feelings, biases or prejudices, only the facts. The online articles were written by two of Australia’s most trusted publications (Keane, 2013), and those publications gave no reason for that trust to decline when covering this incident. Finally, radio reporters managed to remain objective, keeping their opinions concealed when broadcasting the story to the public.
Prominence – The shooting at Ingleburn involved businessman Mick Bassal, who was friends with the son of Alex Vella, the Rebels Motorcycle Club’s president (Morri, 2016). Bassal was the only person involved in the incident to be considered a prominent member of society, therefore he receieved the most coverage out of the hostages involved. However, the Sydney Morning Herald was really the only platform to focus on Bassal’s importance, as the other platforms only referred to him as things like “deceased victim” and “43-year-old man”.
Conclusion
As demonstrated, the stories about the shootings in Ingleburn contain plenty of similarities including the angle of the incident, the comprehensiveness of the details and the fairness of the reporting. The key differences between the stories, however, were the speed with which the shooting was covered, the facts deemed important enough to make up the bulk of the coverage and if those affected by the incident were important enough to mention by name. Social media, specifically Twitter, was far quicker to report on the story and despite a 140 character limitation, still managed to be quite comprehensive with details. In less than half an hour, though, news reports and online articles emerged that filled the public in with more information. By the next day, the four news platforms had all reported on the story. Even though there were differences in regard to news values and the prominence of those involved, the story of what happened on that day in Ingleburn remained the same across social media, TV, radio and the internet.
References
Carroll, M. (2015). How Social Media Platforms Are Changing the Business of News. Retrieved from MediaShift website: http://mediashift.org/idealab/2015/09/how-social-media-platforms-are-changing-the-business-of-news/
Ingram, D. (2008). Chapter 36: Reporting crime. Retrieved from The News Manual website: http://www.thenewsmanual.net/Manuals%20Volume%202/volume2_36.htm
Keane, B. (2013). Trust in media: ABC still leads, Telegraph takes a hit. Retrieved from Crikey website: http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/12/18/trust-in-media-abc-still-leads-telegraph-takes-a-hit/
Khalik, J. (2016). Ingleburn shooting: Police operation at industrial area in Sydney. Retrieved from The Australian website: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/ingleburn-shooting-police-operation-at-industrial-area-in-sydney/news-story/17eba065e480fb006374c85f4bba3c9b
Layt, J., Levy, M, O’Sullivan, M., Olding, R. & Ralston, N. (2016). Sydney shooting: Police, ambulances rush to multiple shooting at Ingleburn. Retrived from The Sydney Morning Herald website: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/live-police-ambulances-rush-to-multiple-shooting-at-ingleburn-southwest-sydney-20160307-gnc80w.html
McCluskey, J. J. (2014). Modern TV, Internet and Social Media News Production. Xlibris Corporation.
Morri, M. (2016). Ingleburn shooting: Bassal brothers shot by Wayne Williams were invited to resolve ongoing dispute. Retrieved from Herald Sun website: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/ingleburn-shooting-bassal-brothers-shot-by-wayne-williams-were-invited-to-resolve-ongoing-dispute/news-story/9b73ce99883db77c8952dc17d9dfc5f3
multiplatformnewsanalysisblog 