It is not really surprising, therefore, that the general public have come to expect instant solutions or results. A recent example of this was the case of the five women found murdered in a very short span of time, around the town of Ipswich. Television, radio and newspaper reporters gave it so much attention, that when a man was arrested only a few days later, the public assumed he was the murderer. It was as though they expected the drama to be played out in the same way they had seen in countless murder mysteries. That man was not charged and, in fact, was released within three days, but the initial attitude of the public was that a trial, and then a verdict, would rapidly follow - because that is the way events work out on television. There was almost a feeling that if you tuned in, say, on successive Fridays, then you would see the trial taking place and follow it to an eventual guilty verdict.

When it comes to news reporting these new technologies provide a tempting and increasing opportunity for managing so-called 'breaking news'. Was it by accident that the death penalty verdict on Saddam Hussein was announced precisely one day before the mid-term elections in the USA - a country where the President and the ruling Republican Party were losing their grip on power.

We have all heard radio and television interviews where it would appear the interviewer has decided exactly what the end result is going to be, and questions the interviewee relentlessly until that person tells them exactly what they want to hear. Often, no matter how consistently the person being interviewed tries to establish a different viewpoint, the interviewer refuses to change his preconception of the outcome.

This use and manipulation of news has been developing over centuries, keeping pace with the various advances in communication technology which have brought us to these digital days. The matter of the Ems Dispatch occurs early in this saga and is a prime example of this kind of manoeuvring.