Kerslake review of response to bombing will consider conduct of mainstream and social media after complaints from families

An inquiry into Manchester’s response to the arena bombing will examine the role played by the media in the aftermath of the attack.

The independent Kerslake arena review – commissioned by the mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham – was tasked with examining the response of the authorities and emergency services to the attack on 22 May 2017, which killed 22 people and injured hundreds more.

In a progress report, published on Friday, the review panel said it would also look at the role of both mainstream and social media during the response phase.

Stuart Murray, whose stepson, Martyn Hett, was killed in the bombing, said reporters had knocked on the door of the family home and asked his daughters if they would give interviews before Hett’s death had been officially confirmed to relatives.

He and his wife had gone to a nearby stadium to find out what had happened to Hett, having heard he was missing, Murray told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Friday. He left the two teenage girls in “what you would imagine would be a safe haven”.

He said: “While we’re trying to find news, reporters are knocking on the door at home, my children are answering it and they’re offering their condolences. They basically were inferring that … he had died and would they be prepared to give an interview or talk about it.

“That’s during the morning and we actually never got confirmation from the police till 10 o’clock at night.”

On the morning after the bombing, Hett’s brother, Dan Hett, complained he had been hounded by the press. He tweeted a photograph of a note that a journalist had put through his letterbox, writing: “I have dealt with 50+ journos online today. Two found my mobile number. This cunt found my house. I still don’t know if my brother is alive.”

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Martyn Hett, whose family said they were visited by members of the press before his death had been officially confirmed. Photograph: Greater Manchester police/PA

The inquiry, chaired by the former head of the civil service, Bob Kerslake, started work in September 2017 and is expected to report in March. It has so far heard evidence from 170 people, with the help of a dedicated phone line managed by the NSPCC children’s charity.



“Following meetings and discussions with some of the bereaved families and some of those who were injured in the attack, the panel is also looking at the role of the media in relation to the families,” the report says.



On Friday, Lord Kerslake told Today part of the problem was the proliferation of the names of missing people on social media. “Then it’s: ‘How do the press respond to that?’ And many did treat the families respectfully,” he said.

He cited Murray’s experience as an example in which journalists did not meet that standard, adding: “What we want to do is to say: ‘What can we learn from that and how can the press and the media behave differently?’”



Kerslake raised the prospect of a charter to govern how media organisations treat people bereaved in incidents such as the arena attack, though he declined to give specifics on the provisions it might contain.

Manchester attack fundraisers say they still have £21,000 to spend Read more

The panel also called on public bodies in Greater Manchester and the north-west of England to support the creation of a charter for families bereaved through public tragedy, which was first proposed in a report, published in November last year, on the experiences of the families affected by the 1989 Hillsborough disaster.

The charter would commit organisations to put the public interest above their own reputation and to “avoid seeking to defend the indefensible or to dismiss or disparage those who may have suffered where we have fallen short”.

Speaking before the publication of the progress report, Kerslake said: “Throughout the review, we have given everyone the chance to have their say and share their experiences of that dreadful night and the days that followed – good or bad – so we can look at what worked well and learn any lessons for the future.

“I’m grateful to everyone who has contributed and come forward with their views and experiences of what was undoubtedly an extremely traumatic event.”