By Gabriel Princewill-
Southend Echo’s editor, Michael Adkins, is today held to account, after his publication failed widow Ellie Sayers, by initially ignoring pleas made by the grieving woman for them to feature her husband’s death at Southend hospital.
A lot of consultation was made by this publication before the decision to openly hold Mr Adkins(pictured) to account for his paper leaving a grieving widow hanging when she turned to them to uphold their duty.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
A wide array of views were evaluated, with a number of them presenting reasons why a stringent stance should not be taken against the paper, whilst others felt the paper had abdicated its responsibility to its readers to keep them fully informed of important news in their community.
What constitutes important news is subjective, but can paradoxically be objectively determined in some cases.
Grieving Ellie who has been suffering recurrent nightmares since she lost her husband in hospital said the hospital has been none responsive in addressing her questions about how her husband of 18 years died in hospital.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Tony Sayers died after visiting Southend hospital on April 25, this year with an infection.
The tragedy unfolded when a medical operation involving a seemingly routine needle led to the rupture of Mr. Sayers’ arteries, resulting in his untimely death.
This turn of events not only left Ms. Sayers grappling with the profound loss of her husband, but also cast a wall of suspicion and doubt over the circumstances surrounding his demise.
Amidst this maelstrom of confusion, grief, and doubt, Ms. Sayers turned to the media for support.
Her attempts to reach out to The Echo Newspaper, a publication with a reputation for local news coverage, initially yielded a glimmer of hope.
On August 7th, she made her first contact to the local paper, and a reporter from The Echo, Sophie England, responded, expressing condolences and requesting her telephone number, which the grieving widow immediately supplied.
However, what followed can only be described as a baffling silence. Subsequent reminders, pleas, and cries for help were met with indifference.
The newspaper which initially seemed sympathetic to her plight suddenly became unresponsive, leaving Ms. Sayers to grapple with despair and suspicion.
Why did the media outlet, which had previously shown interest in her story, now remain aloof and seemingly apathetic?
What upset her was that on an occasion when Mr Sayers once escaped from Basildon hospital after being transferred there from Southend , he climbed up the roof of a scaffolding to protest his complaints.
Grieving Ellie Sayers felt her local Echo paper was complicit in a cover up over her husband’s death.
The Echo covered the story at the time, and would have been expected to follow up on reporting his death, and finding out what happened.
‘I was checking my mails every five minutes, wondering when I would get a call’, the grieving widow said.
‘I called the paper four times and spoke to their receptionist, and was assured my message would be passed on.
‘I was eventually relieved when I received a mail expressing their condolences, and asking for my number. But no call ever came.
‘I emailed the Echo again and again, reminding them to cover the story. They had covered my husband when he escaped from hospital and climbed the top of the scaffolding building to protest, so naturally thought they would be interested.
‘ I them began to panic, and felt they must be covering ranks’.
Some analysts believe the paper was likely beset by a conflict of interest in its decision to ignore the widow.
However, pthers feel the paper have editorial discretion and had no obligation to cover the story.
Content creator, Rob Toss told this publication: ” I think the paper had a duty to cover the story. It is unethical for the paper to have been happy to publish the story when he was protesting at the top of a roof, but not cover it when he is dead’.
‘The poor woman wanted an explanation for he husband’s death, and I think the hospital ought to have provided that within 2 weeks tops’.
Asked what he would say to the possibility the hospital wished to protect the identity of the staff connected to the bungled treatment, or first complete their investigation, he said: ‘its not good enough. They could at least say something explaining that its unfortunate something went wrong, but an investigation is ongoing.
‘Silence is just inexcusable, and a paper like The Echo ought to have known she deserved an answer. Common sense should have told them that silence would only compound her fears and suspicions. It’s bad really’
Another Nhs worker who insisted on anonymity said: ‘it’s bad really, the paper has a duty to uphold standards and ensure accountability.
‘This is the problem with the press, they select what stories to cover, which is their right, but they must be representative of the people. Refusing to cover a death under circumstances that looks suspicious is just not right. One simply smells a rat’
‘Yes. they have a right to cover what they want, but goodness me, you don’t ignore a death in a hospital. How can you justify that?
Another professional, IT consultant, Steve Reynold’s disagreed:” The paper has a choice on what stories it covers. Ms Sayers had the option of contacting other media, like she eventually did in contacting your publication, so why should they be held to account?
‘They could take the view that it doesn’t sell to report on this news, especially as the hospital’s investigation is not yet complete.
Asked to comment on the fact the paper eventually gave the story a front page coverage three weeks later, he said: ”just like your publication took weeks to report on The Echo’s refusal to immediately publish the story, they may have taken time to review their decision’.
Claire Colman, a researcher and tutor, generally sided with the paper. ”The Echo may not have wanted to report on a story about which an allegation was being made until the hospital have a conclusion.
”They may not even believe there is a public interest in the story if they don’t think their readership would be sufficiently interested in it.
They may take the view that not many people would care that a man who visited the hospital with an infection, then later climbed the top of a scaffolding, and then died.
‘When he climbed the scaffolding, that could be seen as voyeurism, and they could feel the public would be interested’.
PR analyst, Abbi Hoxleigh said “Ethical journalism” is about writing the stories that the public needs to hear rather than “clickbait.” It is about making quality decisions
‘The Echo may have felt the story would not sell, or may have been concerned that it could be defamatory for them to report the story.
‘But it appears the story needed to be told’.
The public interest is not just what the public is interested in, but also what is in the public interest.
A strong and objective media is also expected to influence what its readers should know about, irrespective of the natural inclinations of those readers.
Observation
One of the reasons for The Eye Of Media’s delay in publishing this scrutiny was to study the paper’s articles throughout the three weeks of its late coverage and the days after, to assess the seriousness of the news topics in comparison with that of Sayers.
We also wanted to see whether we find any conceivable promotional coverage of the hospital by the paper that may suggest a potential conflict of interest, or cosy relationship with the hospital which may explain the omission to cover the story.
Then bingo! we found one.
A careful study of the paper’s articles within days spotted a promotional article highlighting that robots at the hospital help cancer patients. A similar article had been published four months earlier by The Echo
This publication attended Ellie’s address on Southchurch Road , Essex within days of receiving her call later, discussed with the grieving woman, and took copies of several hospital documents in her possession for analysis.
We covered the story a few days later. It was not until the 29th of August before The Echo ran a front page story of Mr Sayers death, highlighting the questions she had of the hospital, and after we had mailed them to express our concerns about their silence.
An angry friend of Ms Sayers also contacted the paper to express frustration of their lack of coverage.
Solemn Duty
In the realm of journalism, there exists a solemn duty – a duty to uncover the truth, to seek justice, and to hold those in power accountable.
It is a duty that carries immense responsibility, one that is often referred to as the Fourth Estate.
In the case of Ms. Sayers, a grieving widow who seeks answers and justice following her husband’s tragic death, this duty becomes ever more pronounced.
The death raises profound concerns about the hospital’s duty of care and its supervisory responsibilities in such situations, even before a final verdict from the coroner.
Suspicious deaths always raise issues of concern until the findings are laid bare.
What possible reasons would a paper abdicate is responsibility to report on such a story?
Potential Conflicts Of Interest
The most obvious possible reason analyst believe this may have occurred is because of potential conflicts of interest-where an affiliation of some sort between a member or members of an organization with another organization may compromise independence on some occasions.
The paper’s initial omission to cover the story was not necessarily a reflection of complicity in a cover up.
However, it could it could reasonably have been perceived to amount to an inadvertent complicity in in an evasion of accountability.
Historical Context
An experience in 2018 with The Echo when this newspaper reportedly agreed to feature a front-page news story about a paedophile case may be pertinent to the analysis of this story,
The story pertained to the bail of a paedophile three doors away of where he lived with his young step daughter of 7 years old, raised significant concerns about public safety.
The fact the paedophile was bailed so close to the young girl’s house was not public knowledge at the time until we covered it.
However, this crucial news story was inexplicably aborted.
What made this incident even more alarming was the revelation that a former reporter from The Echo was working within the Essex Police press office.
This affiliation, or more aptly, conflict of interest, cast a long shadow over the newspaper’s editorial decisions. Did the presence of this former reporter within the police press office influence The Echo’s reluctance to publish the paedophile story?
The suspicion of a conflict of interest was high, though unverifiable.
Essex police professional standards eventually investigated the matter, revealing that the paedophile was allowed to stay so close to his young step daughter because he was staying their with his mother, and police had conducted a risk assessment of him residing there.
This did not make the explanation satisfactory to us, though we are in no position to comment on risk assessments we did not conduct ourselves.
However, the mother of the young girl who had been seeing Mr Sergeant had been complaining to the father of the girl on our internet radio team, expressing discontent with the situation.
Ethical Journalism
In the aftermath of the disheartening treatment that Ms. Sayers endured at the hands of The Echo, it becomes imperative to question the newspaper’s commitment to ethical journalism and accountability.
Conflict of interest is not a trifling matter; it can erode the integrity of journalism and compromise the pursuit of truth.
The media serves as a powerful check on institutions, ensuring that they remain transparent, accountable, and responsive to the public.
In cases like that of Ms. Sayers, where lives hang in the balance and justice seems elusive, the role of the press is amplified.
Investigative journalism becomes a beacon of hope, a force for uncovering the truth, and a safeguard against complacency and negligence.
Michael Adkins, editor of The Southend Echo was contacted three times for comment in relation to our story.
Essex Live was also contacted for comment.
They both declined to comment.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar