4 ms·

It's fairly typical for the BBC to hold fire until the trial concludes and the legal restrictions around reporting are lifted. I'm not sure I see the AP as hav

It's fairly typical for the BBC to hold fire until the trial concludes and the legal restrictions around reporting are lifted. I'm not sure I see the AP as having more "in depth" reporting, it just has a greater quantity of rolling reporting. Stories like "court case pauses for Covid alarm", "court case resumes", "Assange told to stop interrupting witnesses", "lawyer says Assange could be in prison for a long time" are not, let's be honest, adding to the total sum of understanding around the topic.

ximeng 6y ago
Why are you ignoring “Assange lawyer says Trump offered deal to avoid extradition” and “Lawyer says Assange charged under broad, contentious US law”. Not really sure what your definition of depth is by which these add less depth than the BBC’s literally zero coverage in the last two weeks.
jjgreen 6y ago
> It's fairly typical for the BBC to hold fire until the trial concludes and the legal restrictions around reporting are lifted. Simply not true, look at the coverage for the Johnny Depp libel trial on the BBC site, dozens of articles following the case day-by-day. The fact is they have become a celebrity news channel and don't want to rock the boat.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Simply not true, look at the coverage for the Johnny Depp libel trial Are the legal and practical issues on a civil trial like that really identical to a criminal trial or criminal extradition?
  - ximeng 6y ago
    The post above was in response to a post that claimed the BBC tends not to post regarding a “trial”, and showed a counter-example. Shows that it is not as simple as the original poster suggests but not very clear exactly what criteria the BBC are using.
  - jjgreen 6y ago
    They are not identical but do not preclude extensive reporting as is demonstrated by Craig Murray who single-handed has put the BBC to shame https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

ximeng 6y ago

Why are you ignoring “Assange lawyer says Trump offered deal to avoid extradition” and “Lawyer says Assange charged under broad, contentious US law”. Not really sure what your definition of depth is by which these add less depth than the BBC’s literally zero coverage in the last two weeks.

jjgreen 6y ago

> It's fairly typical for the BBC to hold fire until the trial concludes and the legal restrictions around reporting are lifted. Simply not true, look at the coverage for the Johnny Depp libel trial on the BBC site, dozens of articles following the case day-by-day. The fact is they have become a celebrity news channel and don't want to rock the boat.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> Simply not true, look at the coverage for the Johnny Depp libel trial Are the legal and practical issues on a civil trial like that really identical to a criminal trial or criminal extradition?
- ximeng 6y ago
  The post above was in response to a post that claimed the BBC tends not to post regarding a “trial”, and showed a counter-example. Shows that it is not as simple as the original poster suggests but not very clear exactly what criteria the BBC are using.
- jjgreen 6y ago
  They are not identical but do not preclude extensive reporting as is demonstrated by Craig Murray who single-handed has put the BBC to shame https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/