Grenfell shows how rumour has replaced local scrutiny

One of the most poignant reflections on the tragedy at Grenfell Tower came last week from the journalist Grant Feller, who covered the block while on the Kensington News 27 years ago. “We stood in the entrance hall to Grenfell Tower and knew it was an accident waiting to happen,” he wrote, as residents asked him to raise awareness of the dangerous wiring and broken fire extinguishers – which he did.

Yet he also recalled writing up celebrations and successes of the people who lived there. This was all the stuff of local newspaper reporting.

A powerful local newspaper had clout in the community. Its reporters could scrutinise documents, sit in on council meetings and hold officials to account publicly. With the widespread decline of the local press, Feller argued, there is a democratic deficit: citizens are more vulnerable and voiceless.

The blog run by Grenfell Action Group – which frequently raised safety issues – was threatened in a letter from solicitors representing the council. Such a letter will inevitably feel more intimidating to residents writing for their own website than to a local newspaper with contacts and resources.

Well-connected local news reporters have often been replaced by the rumour mill on sites such as Twitter. Yet Twitter users often have no idea of the basics of sourcing stories and media law – such as that once a suspect is under arrest, you must be careful what you say lest it compromise a future trial.

Some conspiracy theories on Grenfell – that the real number of dead is being actively suppressed by mainstream media – fail to recognise that it will, sadly, take time to establish the true count of all the victims, and it is irresponsible to report anything as fact before then.

When the local press melts away, whether through a lack of popular interest or private investment, the general public is the long-term loser.