I don't quite know why I gravitate towards news stories that I don't know how to feel about. Maybe it is a subconscious desire to air the material out, and hope someone can help me work through it. This is one of those cases especially considering my gender.
So, for those unaware of the circumstances, 33-year-old Sarah Everard was murdered on March 3rd(this is in the UK so you might not have heard about it). Her body was found a week later and a London Metropolitan Police officer was charged with her murder. While this prompted a nationwide conversation regarding the threats and violence women face, the British government responded with programs as well.
"Project Vigilant, the programme can involve officers attending areas around clubs and bars in plainclothes, along with increased police patrols as people leave at closing time"
"Other steps unveiled by Downing Street include a doubling to £45m of the Safer Streets fund, which provides neighbourhood measures such as better lighting and CCTV."
The highly charged and negative media coverage had caused the government to respond, but many saw these responses as "scattershot" or "tone-deaf". I mean, a police officer allegedly murdered the girl, installing more police and calling it fixed certainly isn't the best response to feed to the public.
I don't have any answers or opinions this time. I'm not a woman. So let me pass the question off to others who are more qualified to speak on it.
1.) What should the response from the government have been? If they should have responded at all.
2.) Is there anything the government could even do? Or is this something that should be outsourced to different agencies considering who the alleged murderer is?
3) Are there situations where the government shouldn't respond to media pressure? Or should there always be a response?
No comments:
Post a Comment