ASSANGE - Media Distortion - The Local

Sweden pulls paracetamol meds from retail sales 1 Nov. b/c of a 40% jump in poisoning cases / young women self-harm TRANSLATION "The reason is that more and more poisoned by pain pills since the sale was allowed outside pharmacies for almost six years ago - especially young women who deliberately try to harm themselves."  http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article20707538.ab COMMENT The above article caught my attention, so I thought I'd check out information relating to suicides in Sweden.  Random look, out of curiosity. Got onto The Local Sweden and was surprised to find a pic of Julian Assange in the margin of an unrelated July 2014 article, with a link to a 'Timeline' of 'Julian Assange sex allegations in Sweden.' Unrelated Article - 28 July 2014 FAIR USE - COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Of course, there's no association whatsoever:  the Assange 'timeline' link features in all The Local Sweden articles - new and old, apparently. So even if you click on a current article, Why Americans trust Swedish companies, for example, there's the same Assange pic and 'timeline' in the margin.  Unrelated Article - 28 April 2015 FAIR USE - COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. A quick check indicates this 'timeline' is only a Sweden feature, as it isn't featured in the Austria, France and Germany online editions (although I haven't checked Italy, Norway, Spain or Switzerland). Back to The Local Sweden edition 'timeline' (which I haven't checked in its entirety for accuracy): the very beginning of this 'timeline' has left out some pretty important details:  the matter was dismissed by a prosecutor for lack of evidence before it was revived (which is very unusual); the 'allegations' are police allegations rather than party allegations (the parties merely sought an STD check); the parties had discussions and had met in advance; statements were not taken in accordance with regulations; a policewoman involved in the matter was friend of one of the parties; an unread and unsigned statement was abandoned by one party on learning of police intentions; the unread, unsigned & abandoned 'statement' was loaded onto the police database and subsequently amended. And that's just off the top of my head without digging up a bunch of other relevant material, in response to only the first brief entry under 'August 2010'. I've previously noticed such a 'timeline' in their publication, but I didn't examine it and I had no idea it linked to all their stories.   Uncertain whether it has been an enduring feature of the site, or whether the The Local digs up the link to 'hang out' for a period of time, whenever there is fresh news of Assange. Whatever the case, it looks like that 'timeline' has been active to some extent or other since 28 Oct 2014: Published: 28 Oct 2014 12:09 GMT+01:00 Updated: 11 Mar 2015 10:36 GMT+01:00 So what, exactly, is the point of having a simplistic (and therefore distorted) Assange 'timeline' in the margin of every story, new and old, in The Local Sweden? Perhaps The Local is aiming for an intended audience that's merely interested in some light information?  Even so, I think a 'shallow' readership (ie those with my short attention span ... LOL), wouldn't exactly be overloaded by brief mention of the dismissal and irregularities. The feeling I get is that a simplistic 'timeline' that excludes material facts (and references to police and other irregularities) is a distortion that may be prejudicial to the public perception of Assange, even if that's not intended effect. After these look ups and messing around with formatting, I'm over my original intention for the time being.  See.  Short attention span.  LOL. Suicide rates might have to wait until I take an interest some time again.  PS ... Been a bit embarrassed, wondering whether I have a bias, and whether it's too much to expect inclusion of a host of particulars in a 'timeline' of 'allegations'. But I've gone around full circle and am back at my earlier conclusion:  a 'timeline' that excludes a heap of relevant information is distortion by omission, as the completely whittled down version of events changes how events are perceived by those unfamiliar with the details. It reminds me of those TV shows where someone's on trial answering a question, and they're immediately cut off by a bullying prosecutor and prevented from providing anything but a 'yes' or 'no' answer, while those that sit in judgement are denied the whole picture. What is presented and what is withheld is hugely important.