Rolf Harris arrested. The World Exclusive that wasn’t. The mainstream media fraud.

The Sun newspaper in England has finally named Rolf Harris as the suspect arrested last month in England suspected of “sex abuse” after it been going viral online for the over three weeks. The Sun claimed it was a “World Exclusive” which is a straight out lie and embarrassment to themselves and all mainstream media. 

The issue needs a close look at why the media waited in naming him. Although as I have previously said that the MSM did name Rolf Harris “charade style” in that they gave everyone all the clues to work out who it was, just not his name.

The most likely two reasons that Rolf Harris has been named now:

1. Rolf Harris is due to be questioned by the police for a third time in May and the The Sun did not want to be beaten by other media in naming him.

2. The online media such as websites, blogs and social media like Facebook and Twitter, that have named Rolf Harris have put extreme pressure on the mainstream media to name him. Everyday that has passed that the mainstream media have not named him the MSM’s credibility was being eroded.

The Sun story (Click here to read) has now been picked up by all Australian mainstream media such as the which has run the story titled “British newspaper reports Rolf Harris arrested in sex abuse inquiry” (Click here to read)

The Online Media (or New Media) drive the issue

Rolf Harris’s arrest has been reported online since last November when he was first arrested, although only to a minor degree.

Since his second arrest at the end of March it has gone viral online and I have written two posts on the subject. The first post I wrote on the 30 March 2013 titled “Rolf Harris arrested in UK sex scandal police investigation” has had over 242,000 page views to date and been liked on Facebook over 7000 times for an estimated reach of well over half a million people. (Click here to read the post) These are huge numbers even for a mainstream media site and this is only one online site that has written about the matter. So The Sun claim of a “World Exclusive” is a disgrace and deceives the reader and the public. Those sorts of numbers also put a great deal of pressure on the MSM to name Rolf Harris.

I wrote a second post on the 6th April titled “Rolf Harris. The British police want your help! The evidence. Guilty or not guilty?” (Click here to read)

On the 8th of April the ABC TV show Media Watch did a story on the Australian media’s failure to name Rolf Harris titled “Protecting the famous”.  (Click here to watch or read the transcript) I have little doubt Media Watch was influenced to some degree by social media to do the story. Interestingly Media Watch also failed to name Rolf Harris in their own story criticising the Australian media for not naming him.

The MSM need to give detailed answers on why and who told them not to name Rolf Harris earlier when they have named others in the same matter and other matters.

Rolf Harris has no one to blame but himself for the bad media coverage. He has had plenty of opportunity to call a press conference himself and address the issue. If he had the headlines would probably be a lot more favourable to him and his supporters would have something to fight back with. As detailed in my last post on Rolf Harris, he is in clear breach of crisis management 101. His failure to give his side of the story has left himself with the look of a guilty person and wide open for attack which a lot of people on the social media have done, some in a brutal manner.

This site has a main focus on judicial corruption but I follow stories like this because the mainstream media also fail to report on the corruption in the judiciary which other posts on this site will show you.

For regular readers and all readers for that matter it is worth noting that a small but growing site like this can step up to the plate and help drive an issue when the mainstream media fails to. The figures above, which I will repeat, of 242,000 page views to date and over 7000 likes on Facebook and an estimated reach of well over half a million people for my first post on Rolf Harris show that. As this site and others grow so will their power to see justice set right on many issues.

Update: 1/7/14: Rolf Harris found guilty on all 12 counts of indecent assault (Click here to read more)

This site is independent and reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance and growth of this site it would be greatly appreciated if you make a donation. Click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options (Click here to go to the Donations page)

If you would like to buy a t-shirt or coffee mug visit my online shop (Click here to visit the shop)

Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and promote this post.

And make sure you follow this site by email which is at the top right of this page and about twice a week you be notified when there is a new post on this site.

Thank you for your support

25 replies »

  1. So Shane, tell us all what Rolf was arrested for, it may simply be for hindering, maybe Rolf simply does not want to be involved in heresay, but you seem to use the innuendo that he has molested minors. I do hope that if and when Rolf is cleared, you post a explanation why you singled him out, and apologise accordingly.

    • sorry terry, disagree with your post entirely.

      first the comment “I do hope that if and when Rolf is cleared…why you singled him out…”. in those words alone there seems to be clear bias, and that is exactly what some people in our society use to their advantage. why do you automatically assume/assert that because he is a well known person there is “no way” he could have done such a thing (interfere with children) and he will ultimately be cleared? we have seen many many cases like this before. if you had been questioned by police over such a matter, do you think your name would be all over the MSM within 24 hours? of course it would. so why should he be any different?

      second “it may simply be for hindering”. hindering what? if he is hindering the investigation of child abuse claims but was not involved himself, then IMO he is just as guilty. what, he is helping out his good friends to hide sex crimes against children? i can tell you that even if the mother of my children was involved i would not hinder such an investigation – i would want to protect ALL kids at ALL costs. the only reason i can think of to hinder such an investigation is if they are involved themselves, since i imagine everyone would want to distance themselves from such people/allegations. and following from there, IMO it says a lot about the MSM for helping to conceal it all by not naming him for so long.

      as i have stated before, a lot of well known and influential people use their charm/power to con us into thinking they are good people. and clearly it works.

      • Could amosteve explain to us what the power of H.R.H Queen Elizabeth II relates to in the investigation of Savill and Harris.
        If he is suggesting the queen would interfere with British justice he is mistaken. Queen Elizabeth is the current head of THE CROWN, she is not THE CROWN.

    • He has been arrested in connection with a paedo inquiry. That is (at least now) public knowledge. There are now legitimate public questions concerning his conduct, and at least what he knew. Oh, and “simply for hindering”?… Paedo inquiry? …You might like to think about that one.

  2. Both Jim Savell and Rolf Harris have been hidden from the public scrutiny for many years. Both had very close ties to the Royals. There should be no under estimation of just how powerful the queen is.

  3. I might add another possible reason why MSM were reluctant to name Rolf Harris,….because there exists a powerful group with connections to the ruling elite, who use their influence with the owners of MSM to downplay or suppress adverse news affecting their favourite sons.

    This gives them further ‘breathing space’ to continue to use their influence to corrupt the police investigation and the judicial process.

    And the reason they would go to so much trouble over Rolf is that because if they fail to protect him, he may incriminate them,..hence they are looking after themselves.

    . .

    • Ben you have hit the nail powerfully on the head, it is a pity that some commentators are suffering from perverted “hero worship” the facts are ignored when all they want to see is “glitter” one example is the female who claimed that the “royal commission into sexual abuse” is just CATHOLIC BASHING she ignores the thousands of convictions of CATHOLIC PRIESTS AROUND THE WORLD.
      Rolf Harris is a great entertainer and in fact an ICON but that does not indemnify him, it will be interesting to see what unfolds in this matter…

  4. thankfully we have kangaroo court to cut through the garbage we are dealt ,rolf harris is no different from any of us .

  5. As in Australia the hierarchy will always protect the goody members of the community specially when they are close to the monarchy, as is the case with Saville and Harris.As an expatriot I have known for years that Saville was a pervert but I have no reason to suspect that Rolf Harris was nothing but a great artist and a formidable entertainer.I sincerely hope that Harris will be cleared of any nasty acts.Allan Myalup.WA

  6. The continuous comments from ‘those who know everything’ and want to side with royalty aquaintance Harris should sit back and wait for a verdict. Rolf Harris knows the truth, and if he is innocent should have publicly quashed the murmurs and whispers at onset of the rumours.
    Literate people would be aware that Shane is chopping through the media articles to report the situation in plain, simple English.

  7. Thanks Shane, if it was not for you, we would ne totally unaware of this.
    I think the non-reporting of the MSM is just as much a crime as the biased-reporting or
    totally incorrect reporting.
    I would also say, if this person was innocent, by now he should have caused a storm!

  8. He may have been arrested, but is under no charges. Until there are actual charges we cannot say even exactly what it is that he has been arrested for much less whether or not he is guilty of it. I don’t say that he is not guilty, but I am also not saying that he is, because for starters, as I said we do not even know what it is we are judging him for exactly. We can make educated guesses, as has been done here, but when all is said and done they are still just guesses, no matter how much justification the author may feel in making them. There is no solid evidence one way or the other, and why? Simply because we do not know what it is that Rolf Harris is being arrested for because no formal charges have as yet been laid. Once formal charges have been made and some idea of the evidence at hand becomes public I will make a decision on the matter, and not before. I don’t care how silent Rolf is being. I will not judge him or anyone else without knowing what it is I am judging them for and why.

    • I dont think any person is trying to pre judge whether or not some is guilty of any crime in this disscussion. What people are upset about is a two tier legal system where a celebrity’s conections or power, gives them imunity from public reporting.

  9. For another example of Old Media vs Blogosphere its worth watching how the Boston bombing is being dealt with. Its like two parallel universes. In the case of Rolf I do wonder if the Law concerning Media is running a long way behind the changes that are occurring in and around that industry resulting in silly affairs like this happening. I don’t think Politicians, Lawmakers etc have yet got a handle on what a powerful, game-changer the Internet is even now. The attempts around the world to censor, hobble and otherwise take control of it suggest they are learning however.

  10. Derryn hinch said exactly the same thing you have said Shane. In his human headline website today he said that the msm has questions to answer in why they didn’t name Rolf Harris until now. There was no legal reason not to name Harris. The Australian media didn’t want to “name & shame” an Australian icon. The msm thought that Rolf Harris would “never do a thing like that”.

  11. Off topic … “She is not amused”, neither will the individuals be amused, those who wanted to believe an ‘Icon’ would be ‘right royally protected’.
    A ‘kangaroo’ was tied down and the MSM should learn, their electronic pens are not mightier than the sword of justice.

  12. How can they do these investigations if they cannot risk offending famous people after all they have the money to clear their names,its the original innocents and victims who have not had a voice,they are the innocent ones.

  13. Being an Aussie living here in the USA, I must say that the Laws here in the USA are different from those in the UK and Australia in relation to Defamation.

    Being what would be called a Public Person naming anyone that is a suspect is basically OK, as it falls under the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    But none the less this really saddens me about Rolf Harris, I have some great memories of him from when I was back at home in Australia…!!

Leave a Reply