Many journalists have not researched the issues surrounding animal rights activism often whatever NETCU states is simply regurgitated after reporters have been spoon-fed the story.
We believe in a free press but are disgusted by media hysterics concerning ‘animal rights extremism’ which consistently omits violence and harassment from police and animal abusers.
The following are examples of the current state of media bias and our response to it.
Responses to articles which equate peaceful protest with violent assaults
‘Animal rights group plans day of protests’ (07/08/06 Cambridge Evening News)
Our Response…
‘EXCLUSIVE: Animal Lib Uni Terror’ (06/08/06 Sunday Mail)
Our Response…
‘Animal rights militants are paid legal aid’ (18/06/06 Times article)
Our Response…
‘Public turns on Animal Terrorists’ (29/05/06 Telegraph article)
Our Response…
‘Animal rights activists are simply thugs’ (25/08/05 Janet Street-Porter article in The Independent)
Our Response…
‘We’re victims say activists’ (06/09/05 Burton Mail Article)
Our Response…
Yes, Noam Chomsky showed how the mainstream media is biased in Manufacturing Consent (book and film). The way the activists are labelled “extremists” already denotes a bias. The violence against the animals is not noted or downplayed or excuses. There is no unbiased reporting here; it is one-sided. Who speaks for the animals? They are in jail and silenced.