Maisie: Page 94, the Private Eye Podcast
Andy: Hello and welcome back to our miniseries for the Paul Foot Awards.
We're speaking every day this week to a brilliant journalist or
team of journalists shortlisted for this year's Paul Foot Award.
So without any further ado, let's get on with today's mini episode and find
out who is up for the award today.
Charlie: My name is Charlie Brinkers Cuff and the publications that these
stories were published in with The Guardian and the Reuters Institute
for the Study of Journalism.
Andy: can you tell me what is the story that brought you to
the pool for awards this year?
Charlie: So I started researching how the media reports on missing people
and how we can improve our coverage for Reuters, and published a research
paper with them and then summarized that for an opinion piece of the guardian.
And then I pitched a series of long form articles also to the guardian.
Looking into some of the issues that were raised in my research and specifically I
started with the story of a, woman named Fiona Hol, who went missing in 2023.
And, her body still hasn't been found.
I.
Andy: The genesis of this story came some years ago, didn't it?
I, think you wrote about something that happened when you were
working as a young reporter.
Was it at the Times
Charlie: Yeah, so I wasn't, working as such, but I was, I was on work
experience, and I think it was in 2014 I was there and I've, spoken about
this quite a lot actually in the past.
But, it is important context, I think because it has genuinely shaped
my whole career, this incident.
Basically I was on the news desk and a news editor came into the newsroom
and he announced to the newsroom that there was a particular missing case
that he wanted a reporter to cover.
And the way in which he described the reasons for covering this case
were based on the characteristics of the, girl who'd gone missing.
And he said that she was pretty, that she was middle class.
he said that she was creative.
And most importantly, he said, our readers are gonna love her.
I'll always remember that he was like, our readers gonna love her.
it was just shocking because I was sitting there as the only brown person
in the room and hearing him say so.
That they were making coverage decisions based on something that
they absolutely shouldn't be based on.
and so yeah, that sort of stayed with me for a long time.
And then as I got farther in my career, I covered a, few other missing cases and
I had a, friend or person in my wider friendship group who also went missing.
And yeah, it's just an issue that I care about a lot
Andy: and the, statistics are extraordinary.
It's 170,000 people, as you've reported, who go missing in
the UK every year, and public.
coverage of these cases is, as you've said, really limited, and quite heavily
filtered through the characteristics of the people who've gone missing
the, decisions news editors are making about what they think is going to
either cell papers or get viewers.
Charlie: I think it's important when we talk about the 170,000
number that we recognize that most of those people do come home.
and I think that's one of the issues that we have with the coverage is that we
focus so heavily on the crime aspects of.
Missing cases that we miss.
The reasons for a lot of these people going missing in the first
place of that, that large, figure, which is horrifically large, let's
not downplay it like the, that many people should not be going missing,
but only a tiny percentage of those cases are related to crime in any way.
So you have that initial filter and then within that you have the filter
of, the characteristics, the fact that.
If you are a, white woman, for example, you're gonna get more coverage than,
pretty much any other demographic if you, have the misfortune of going missing.
And I think, again, just to, to round this up, I think it's very important to
say that it's not that you know myself or anyone else who's working in this area.
Thinks that, there should necessarily be less coverage of, some missing cases.
It's just about creating equity and also interrogating the type of coverage that
all of these cases get because I think even for the women who are getting a
lot of coverage around their cases, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's helping
find them or it's helping to interrogate the reasons why they have gone missing.
Also.
Andy: so can you tell me a little bit about the case of Fiona Home?
Charlie: Fiona Home went missing on the 20th of June, 2023.
she was, by all accounts, an absolutely amazing person.
She had, Children, they adored her.
She was funny.
She was a little bit sassy.
I remember her daughter told me that she always put like all of the sauces
on the chips, like if you got like, a chippy chip shop, chips, she would put
like all these different sources on them.
And her family were just so good at painting like a picture of her that felt
so vivid and, so complex and so whole.
and she had a big family as well.
So it's, I think she was one of something like, I wanna say nine siblings.
It was like a lot of them, from a Caribbean family.
But she had the misfortune of, meeting a man called Carl Cooper,
and she was dating him, seeing him on and off, for about six months,
I believe, before she went missing.
But the really shocking thing about her case is that Carl Cooper had actually
been arrested the year prior in 2022 for the murder of a woman called Naomi Hunt.
and she was also a black woman in her forties, like Fiona was, and she was
found, her body was found very sadly, on Valentine's Day in 2022, I believe.
So she'd been stabbed to death.
Naomi had called the police on him on multiple occasions for assault
she alleged that he was stalking her and all this kinda stuff.
after she was found murdered, he was arrested and then let go and then he
started seeing Fiona and she disappeared.
And then the police, really swiftly after that, arrested him
for the murder of both women.
And so I sat through the court case in summer of, 2024 and he was ultimately
convicted for both of their murders.
But obviously there's these sort of gaping questions that emerge there.
Why was it that he was arrested for an Naomi's murder and then let go?
Fiona also called the police on him on multiple occasions.
She alleged that he attacked her with a screwdriver.
I think she even showed disguise, from that incident, to her sister.
and yet she wasn't protected.
And so my story was looking into how the system failed Fiona, and just hopefully
making the reader sort of question.
Some of their own biases
Andy: Can I ask how you perceive the point of missing persons journalism?
Because I think it's a really interesting story in the way that you
are trying to deal with coverage that hasn't been written in many ways.
You're trying to point out gaps and omissions in the way that missing persons
Journalism is conducted in the uk.
what do you see as, the purpose of it?
Charlie: That's a really brilliant question because I think that
it serves multiple purposes.
I think that what I am doing at the moment is, yeah, you're totally right.
it's not just news reporting.
It's not just.
here's information about a missing person.
Where are they?
Let's find them.
Which I think is what the purpose of a lot of missing person
coverage is and should be.
, But this is hoping to stay, take a step beyond that.
And that's what I think makes it investigative because it's
looking at these failings and it's asking deeper questions
about society and about the world.
but to, I guess to answer your original question, I think the point of
coverage that most journalists believe.
is that they are helping to contribute to the search to find this person.
But unfortunately, the reality is that there's very limited
statistical evidence showing that journalistic coverage is useful
necessarily for helping find people.
that doesn't mean that, we shouldn't be doing it.
We absolutely should.
And there are, there's lots of anecdotal evidence that, sometimes
our coverage can be helpful, but it does mean that we need to take a
massive step back within our industry.
and question our sort of righteousness when we move in ways that are quite
unethical around telling these stories and can maybe sometimes congratulate
ourselves for some of this coverage when actually like the moral imperative for it
is not as clear cut as you might presume.
Andy: how do you think, I, suspect there's a fairly obvious answer to this question.
How do you think the media can improve their coverage of, these cases?
Charlie: Andy, I've written
a whole, spreadsheet for people to take a look at.
I can look, I can list it, but let me, read out maybe some top lines for you.
just to choose three things I think that we can do a bit better.
I think the first thing we can do is, do a better job at
respecting privacy and sensitivity.
And so what I wrote is that everyone has got the right to be forgotten.
And it could be hard, obviously, to, for journalists to get stories
over the line without family and friends willing to give interviews.
but approaches during times of crisis should absolutely be considerate.
And often you'll find that they're not.
And there are families that I've spoken to both on and off the record who's who's
just told me about how traumatizing it was really to have journalists approach
them in ways that lacked sensitivity.
I think the second thing, and I think what I attempted to do with
Fiona's story, is this idea of engaging with complex stories.
So one thing that I heard again and again from.
Reporters and, sometimes from editors is that they're quite wary
of stories where there's a history of, say, substance abuse or where
the person has gone missing before.
there's a preference for stories where the disappearance is unusual,
where there's a mystery and where there's suspected foul play.
But what I've written here is that.
Simple stories aren't always what the public want or need, and I think there's
a real, strong case to be made for looking at sort of some of these bigger, broader,
thematic stories that come out of those 170,000 people that go missing each year.
and then the final thing.
I think, and yeah, just I guess it's good to mention them, is, just
highlighting support available to missing people and their loved ones.
obviously there's a really brilliant charity called Missing People,
and it's a great resource and, I believe can and should be used.
Similarly to the way that the Samaritans are used for suicide reporting.
missing people.
They've got lots of resources available online and, they've also come up
up with their own guidelines for journalists, to use in the newsroom
if they have any sort of questions or thoughts about missing people.
And they're also very open to having phone calls with us and,
chatting through stories with us.
So that's good as well.
Andy: we are coming to the end of our time.
There's just one more question, which I, try and ask at the end of all of these,
which is, where does the story go next?
Charlie: We're still awaiting the results of the I-O-I-O-P-C investigation, there
were allegations of misconduct within the police service that there was a
particularly shocking thing, which is that, after Fiona disappeared, a
person, anonymous person called into the police service and said, I believe
that Carl Cooper has murdered Fiona, and this is where he's buried her bo body.
And that phone call was dismissed as a hoax.
And just repeated failings throughout, this case, throughout fairness
case and throughout Naomi's case.
So it'll be really interesting to see what the IOPC has to say and I'm
keeping a sort of close eye on them.
And then beyond that, I think in terms of my wider work around
missing, it's about data research.
It's about inter interrogating other stories around missing, it's about
looking at the social is issues that are pervasive if around missing.
So would that be children in care homes?
Would that be homelessness?
this is part of a much bigger story to do with the disintegration of
the social fabric, that we live in.
And, yeah, I really want to just keep on investigating these stories and telling
them my, the very best of my ability.
Andy: thank you so much for your time and congratulations
again on your shortlisting.
Thank you,
Charlie: Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Andy: Thanks so much to Charlie.
Extraordinary story there.
Really interesting about the way the media operates.
We will be back again tomorrow with episode four.
See you then.