Pro-Hunt Media

At the end of one of the Countryside Alliance's Declaration Day events the speaker announced: "Ladies and Gentlemen, I just want to tell you that we have been very lucky today to be so well supported by the media ... we need the coverage from the media, they are helpful to us. Will you all please join with me and thanking them for their support."

The importance the bloodsport fraternity places on media coverage cannot be under-estimated. At a regional gathering of the Countryside Alliance in 2003 a leading figure said that they "had called in some favours from sympathetic journalists to limit the damage" of a protest at Parliament which had descended into violence.

After sixty police officers were injured policing another Countryside Alliance rally at Parliament, the Daily Mail defended the violence commenting that "this explosion of rage by those who wouldn't normally dream of breaking the law..." One wonders where the Daily Mail and other pro-hunt newspapers have been burying their heads for the past 110 years if they really believe violence and law-breaking by hunt supporters is something new, it isn't and it is about time they reported the reality of hunting rather than the picture postcard image they want us to believe.

The media and especially the BBC's interest in hunting with hounds is considerably greater than its national significance or is justified by the small number who actually takes part in it, which begs the questions, how many more favours are being called in?

In February 2004 the BBC reported that "record crowds" had attended the Waterloo Cup from information given to them by Waterloo Cup officials. Six months later, after many complaints, the BBC finally admitted this was wrong. This not only highlights how the media is prepared to mislead the public but shows the one sided nature of their coverage. Similarily on Boxing Day each year the media unquestionably reports 'massive turn out' of hunt supporters based entirely on Countryside Alliance figures not fact.

We know of hunters threatening to withdraw advertising from newspapers if they went ahead with reports showing the reality of hunting. This led to an instance where a story made the national newspapers but the local paper where the incident happened wouldn't print it even though there was both video and photographic evidence. Similarily one company we know of threatened to take legal action if a newspaper went ahead with a story linking them to hunting. The story was dropped even though they had planned to use it on the front page.

The extent that the bloodsport fraternity will go to try and stop newspapers printing anything that might show hunting in its real light was recently revealed by the Western Daily Press. Tim Bonner, head of the Countryside Alliance's media department, and its chief executive, Simon Hart had written privately to the paper demanding that the Western Daily refuse to print what they consider to be offensive and inaccurate letters about the highly controversial subject of hunting. Mr Bonner ended his correspondence with an inferred threat that they were considering sanctions against this paper, "unless I receive immediate assurances from you (the Western Daily Press) that such material will not be published in future." How many newspapers have received similar demands and given into their demands?