Just to edit this OP as it seems confusing, UTV and The Guardian are linking the attack to anti-GFA republicans but the Newsletter and the Irish Independent don't see it as politically motivated, citing criminal reasons. Also UTV led with the headline: Off duty police officer 'shot in Bangor'.
I also see UTV has added the critical word 'allegedly' since they first reported the shooting. Very nice of them. The Guardian is pointing the finger at anti-GFA republicans and understands the PSNI man's role is a personal protection officer who wears plain clothes when on duty. Reports also indicate the lucky policeman hails from west Belfast. Where they got this info I don't know, perhaps UTV.
The Newsletter reports other media outlets have reported that the incident is not believed to be 'terrorist related'. A PSNI spokeswoman said: “Police are currently dealing with an alleged shooting incident in the Springhill area of Bangor involving an off-duty police officer''. At least the Newsletter is attempting not to look stupid.
The Irish Independent has strangely claimed it isn't politically motivated. They believe the PSNI thinks it may be an attack by a criminal armed gang in the area.
What's with all this confusion? I know UTV's reportage is garbage at the best of times, but scaremongering and reporting incidents as fact, when they clearly aren't is dangerous at best and felon setting at worst. I'm sure others could even accuse it of having an agenda. It's particularly dangerous at this time when unionists and loyalists are angry at the removal of the Union flag in Belfast and tempers are on a knife edge.
Calling this lazy would almost indicate it's merely bad reporting, but it's certainly more than that, it is dangerous reporting.