Justice for the 96
A cliché often heard in history classes is that “history is written by the victors.” This notion that the truth behind historical events is influenced by those left to record them is one that is emphasized on events in the more distant past. Events that occurred more recently are less often given this scrutiny, and many times the first version of the truth, the “winner’s” version, becomes widely accepted. Furthermore, because this truth is distributed by people in positions of power, often through an official mainstream media channel, the story that is immediately told is trusted and accepted by the masses. Unfortunately, this lack of scrutiny can lead to the spread of incorrect information being passed off as facts. It can take years to correct public perception, and as the Hillsborough Disaster of 1989 shows us, the consequences for groups of people can be disastrous. In the case of Hillsborough, the misinformation came directly from the police, and was reiterated by authority figures in both the political and soccer worlds. This paper will examine how this “truth” came about, and how what was recorded as truth was a direct result not of the events that happened, but rather by what those in power wished to convey. Additionally, it will contrast how those in power so …show more content…
Unfortunately for the families, the coroner excluded all evidence collected after 3:15pm, combined with the fact that many official statements given by police working that day had been altered to paint the police in a more positive light, resulted in every death being ruled as accidental . With no one to officially blame for the deaths, the public remained convinced that the drunkenness of the Liverpool fans had been the primary cause of the
A cliché often heard in history classes is that “history is written by the victors.” This notion that the truth behind historical events is influenced by those left to record them is one that is emphasized on events in the more distant past. Events that occurred more recently are less often given this scrutiny, and many times the first version of the truth, the “winner’s” version, becomes widely accepted. Furthermore, because this truth is distributed by people in positions of power, often through an official mainstream media channel, the story that is immediately told is trusted and accepted by the masses. Unfortunately, this lack of scrutiny can lead to the spread of incorrect information being passed off as facts. It can take years to correct public perception, and as the Hillsborough Disaster of 1989 shows us, the consequences for groups of people can be disastrous. In the case of Hillsborough, the misinformation came directly from the police, and was reiterated by authority figures in both the political and soccer worlds. This paper will examine how this “truth” came about, and how what was recorded as truth was a direct result not of the events that happened, but rather by what those in power wished to convey. Additionally, it will contrast how those in power so …show more content…
Unfortunately for the families, the coroner excluded all evidence collected after 3:15pm, combined with the fact that many official statements given by police working that day had been altered to paint the police in a more positive light, resulted in every death being ruled as accidental . With no one to officially blame for the deaths, the public remained convinced that the drunkenness of the Liverpool fans had been the primary cause of the