StatCounter

Friday 10 February 2012

Not the whole story on the BBC

I rarely print whole stories for comparison but this one is so stark that I feel it warrants it.

First the BBC article hidden away on the Manchester news page:
'Man charged with assault on teenager in Hyde

A man has been charged with assault after an attack on a teenage boy in Greater Manchester left him with fractured eye sockets.

The 21-year-old from Hyde was charged following the attack on the 17-year-old in Tameside on Saturday.
After falling while trying to escape a gang of young men, the teenager was punched and kicked on the ground.
The man was remanded in custody at Tameside Magistrates' Court to appear at Manchester Crown Court in March.

A 17-year-old boy was also arrested in connection with the incident, but has been bailed pending further enquires.

Police said the teenager and his friend were passing a takeaway in Hyde when a group of young men and women began goading them.

One of the boys was punched and kicked as he lay on the ground, suffering two fractured eye sockets, while his friend was punched in the face.

The first victim is now in a stable condition.'
Not a lot of context or detail there....

Now the same news as in The Mail - just the start of the article as the missing details are all there:
'Was this boy beaten senseless because he's white? Teenager fighting for his sight after 'hate attack' by Asian gang.

A teenager was left for dead after being chased and savagely beaten by a gang of Asians in a suspected racist attack.

Daniel Stringer, 17, was pursued through a busy town centre by up to eight men and then repeatedly kicked and punched in the head.

He was left in the road, bleeding and barely conscious, as the gang melted away into the night.

Police say there is no evidence of provocation and are treating the attack as a serious hate crime.'

Why is there no mention of the assailants' race on the BBC? Why no mention on the BBC of the police treating the attack as 'serious hate crime'?

What is the BBC playing at?

No comments: