Thread by @OborneTweets

IN today's British Journalism Review cover story @cooke_millie and I expose the deafening media silence over the Julian Assange hearing, despite its momentous consequences for free speech and investigative journalism.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117…

We show how the @TheEconomist didn't bother to cover his hearing- but back his extradition regardless.

We asked the @NewStatesman, which ran a articles trashing Assange, why they ignored the case. The paper told us "we don’t publish court reports."

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117…

The Spectator avoided the issue, barring a few cursory references. The Sunday Telegraph has not mentioned Julian Assange since April 2019.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117…

Coverage of the Assange hearing was swamped by the coverage allocated to the libel hearing involving the actor Johnny Depp.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117…

We asked the BBC about its failure to cover the hearing, given the presence of a reporter throughout. It said: “It is not unusual to have a member of staff present at major court cases in order to monitor events and pass news lines on to editorial staff if and when they develop.”

Julian Assange’s defence, led by Edward Fitzgerald QC, argued forcibly that Assange’s only crime was the crime of investigative journalism. A subject about which most of the British media couldn't care less.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117…

The Mail on Sunday, Independent, and the Observer covered the case energetically. We specially praise @jamesdoleman at Bridges for Media Freedom, @CraigMurrayOrg for providing serious daily reporting of the heading. And @medialens for its caustic commentary on media coverage.

And how could I have forgotten? A specially big and richly deserved kick up the arse for Richard Littlejohn.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117…