MrDuck Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Article on the case, and specifically the station, from an Oz policewoman: It sounds like if this station is closed down, that can only be a good thing, regardless of their culpability in this case. I see their shares are down 7.7%, and Anonymous are on their case. The station is a fecking disgrace, always has been and this incident is just the latest (and worst) in a long line of unbelievable stupidity and callousness. I hope it is closed down, although I somehow doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I see their shares are down 7.7%, and Anonymous are on their case. Aah yes, Anonymous clearly on the case. You can tell because the video opens with text ".. we are Anonyomous" /facepalm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiegoD Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I've never understood the amount of hate 2dayfm gets. They comfortably have the most successful commercial radio shows because they know what the majority of people want to listen to and that is trashy lowest common denominator stuff. They have crossed the line a few times (the 14 yr old girl and lie detector was horrible) but the majority of people still want to listen to it because its entertaining. This should have been a nothing incident. They pranked called a hospital into telling them what most people already knew. The poor nurses were they subjected to a global press shit storm and one of them tragically has taken her life (though it very likely there were many other factors involved here). I just do not understand how anyone can seriously blame the radio hosts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Who else is going to get the blame? The media are not going to blame themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Call me old fashioned, but I always think that one of the hallmarks of a demonstration is that there is some attempt to communicate ideas to observers. This guy seems to have been performing manoeuvres which apparently held some meaning to him, but couldn't have been understood by others. Daredevil legend? Or deeply troubled person? I understand he was soon retired on "medical grounds". But mental health issues were less openly discussed in those days. He was retired because they wanted to avoid a court martial and the embarrassment to the Wilson government. Wilson; the man who carried out the Beeching cuts. T••ser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I just do not understand how anyone can seriously blame the radio hosts. Yes, responsibility clearly sits with the station, which vetted the broadcast, tried to get consent from the hospital and/or staff to run it (because the Commercial Radio Australia code of practice requires them to), and ran it anyway. Quite likely the idea didn't come from the presenters in the first place. A former presenter on that station describes here their general approach: A radio presenter has accused Southern Cross Austereo of having a culture that encourages “revolting behaviour” including forcing her to go along with faking her own death in an on-air stunt... That is from July, not written with regard to this recent incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 He was retired because they wanted to avoid a court martial and the embarrassment to the Wilson government. Well, so says Wikipedia, which turns out to rest on the pilot's own view. Why he thought that his stated reasons for his actions could be suppressed if he was retired on medical grounds but not if he was court martialled is unclear. As for his condition and state of mind at the time and afterwards, let's hear from Biggles himself: ...I dosed myself with some strong quick-cure anti-histamine drugs bought from a chemist before being prescribed more triominic drugs by the station doctor on the Monday (April 1). These drugs, he said, would make me sleepy but in fact had the reverse effect, keeping me ultra alert and sleepless...Tangmere hospitality was excellent, with a cocktail party ... In a rather supercharged state and after so little sleep on the toxic drugs I had been prescribed, I filled the odd available ear about subjects dear to my heart... in particular the fighting effectiveness of the RAF and the poor celebrations during this special year. The party at RAF Tangmere was a good one: champagne flowed! I had two-and-a-half hour's sleep, awakened by the loud throbbing downwash of a helicopter from Thorney Island flying very close to the Mess, partly on a recovery mission to pick off our boss's boater which had somehow found its way to the top of a rather inaccessible Tangmere flagpole! With what turned out later to be suppressed pneumonia emphasised by the anti-histamine drugs I had been given, champagne, high spirits and lack of sleep, my mind had evidently "speeded" up and I was quite unable to go to sleep again. My mind went back over the past three or four days and the Government's decisions of the last few years. Surely I was not alone feeling strongly that the tremendous contribution of the RAF had been sold rather short on its 50th Anniversary? With the Anniversary week coming to a close, I concluded that at least one celebration flag wave across the Houses of Parliament, Downing Street, the Ministry of Defence and most of all the RAF Memorial that day was quite in order... I felt now like some voyeur or landscape artist, so intoxicated with the various views to the left and right of me that it was literally just before my wings crossed London Bridge when I looked ahead and suddenly saw Tower Bridge. There, standing like some proud, strong sentinel across the Thames, this famous matronly structure blocked my low level path to the east. Until this very instant I'd had absolutely no idea that, of course, Tower Bridge would be there. It was easy enough to fly over it, but the idea of flying through the spans suddenly struck me. I had just ten seconds to grapple with the seductive proposition which few ground attack pilots of any nationality could have resisted. My brain started racing to reach a decision. Years of fast low level strike flying made the decision simple.. (Then he buzzes some airfields, lands, and is arrested) After such little sleep, I was restless. Exhausted but unable to sleep, I asked the doc. for something to help me sleep at 1.30 p.m. This was refused and, as was apparently normal service procedure on occasions like this, I had to wait seven hours further for them to get hold of an RAF psychiatrist. He eventually arrived at 8.30 p.m. and after an hour or so pronounced me quite definitely of sure mind, but in a rather tired and cold-ridden body. After a day and a half I became rather fractious at being held under close arrest for obviously "political" reasons and asked to be released to open arrest. My deaf AOC last month was now even deafer. With my spirits high I then started playing up, locking up my officer guard. However, the press made it uncomfortable and I remained cooped up inside in a state of siege. To take the heat off I was taken to Nocton Hall. Always an athletic climber and in high spirits - 14 years earlier I regularly climbed with, but below fellow course member Chris Bonington - I climbed out and onto a roof unnoticed and wickedly watched with some glee the intriguing denouement below. I was transferred to Wroughton where the suppressed pneumonia following my terribly heavy cold broke out. A combination of drugs and disillusion now slowly sapped my spirit... Not hard to see why a discharge on medical grounds might have been thought appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 He was retired because they wanted to avoid a court martial and the embarrassment to the Wilson government. Wilson; the man who carried out the Beeching cuts. T••ser I appreciate this is not a political thread but your "hatred" of Labour and Wilson re Beeching is somewhat wrong IMO Beeching report was commissioned by a Tory Gvmt. Marples was the key driver of it (part of the McMillan "you have never had it so good" Gvmt). Beeching was published in 1963 and Labour (Wilson) did not come to power until Oct 1964. They carried on with the recommendations of the report with the support of the then Tory opposition. In 1983 when Thatcher came to power a further report was commissioned - Serpell Report - which suggested further cuts to the rail network. - Luckily that report was never implemented due to pressure from various bodies. As Ian Hislop has said who has studied Beeching a lot of what the report suggested in terms of replacement buses etc was never fully implemented and that which was suffered massively because of the privatization that Thatcher introduced But that is politicis and nowt to do with this thread :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Labour came to power with the promise of not carrying out those cuts. They then carried them out. I loathe the Tories for the short sightedness of Beeching’s cuts. But Wilson takes the biscuit with duplicity. Go to Hawick and see what they have to say... Oh maybe because the borders weren’t Labour seats? And for the record Labour only carried out the negatives of Beeching, not the investment. Wilson has a huge amount to answer for. As does Super Mac and Grocer Heath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Sounds like any normal working week in the Crabs to me?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Well, so says Wikipedia, which turns out to rest on the pilot's own view. Why he thought that his stated reasons for his actions could be suppressed if he was retired on medical grounds but not if he was court martialled is unclear. As for his condition and state of mind at the time and afterwards, let's hear from Biggles himself: Not hard to see why a discharge on medical grounds might have been thought appropriate. Maybe. Or maybe he would have queried the TRS2/F111/F4-Phantom/Buccaneer Fiasco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Maybe. Or maybe he would have queried the TRS2/F111/F4-Phantom/Buccaneer Fiasco But why would a medical discharge prevent him from doing so? I just don't see the connection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Daily Mail getting a little confused. There's a first time for everything, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDuck Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 This should have been a nothing incident. They pranked called a hospital into telling them what most people already knew. The poor nurses were they subjected to a global press shit storm and one of them tragically has taken her life (though it very likely there were many other factors involved here). I just do not understand how anyone can seriously blame the radio hosts. Well perhaps because the whole shit storm wouldn't have happened if the djs hadn't made the call. I mean seriously, what sort of prick prank calls a fecking hospital? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted December 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 13, 2012 Well perhaps because the whole shit storm wouldn't have happened if the djs hadn't made the call. I mean seriously, what sort of prick prank calls a fecking hospital? What sort of hospital (especially one for rich and famous people) doesn't have procedures to deal with media attempts to gain information on its clients? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 What sort of hospital (especially one for rich and famous people) doesn't have procedures to deal with media attempts to gain information on its clients? Still not much comment on that side of things in the media. It mostly seems to be a focus on individuals (were the DJs thoughtless, was the nurse depressed) instead of looking at the wider context (media scrum, routinely using unethical methods either to get confidential information about trivia, or else to amuse) and the organisational failings (radio station has a history of low standards and shoddy behaviour, hospital failed to deal properly with information security). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I'll just leave this here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I'll just leave this here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I don't think you can blame the DJ's for the Suicide directly, however. What would have happened if she had not committed suicide, what if she had just lost her job? It would not have made the press. Would that have been OK. Now as I understand according to OZ broadcasting rules you are not allowed to record and play things without the other persons consent. No consent was asked for but it was still played. Is that OK. Why phone a hospital at 5 in the morning to get to a patient, presumably it would have just been as funny at midday uk, but of course that wouldn't have been prime time in OZ, maybe a just a bit inconvenient for them. The other thing is when they connected a 14 year old to a lie detector, why ask a minor about their sex life. Is that OK. Now how could they have known that a suicide would occur, or a 14 year old admitted being raped. IMO they don't give a toss about the victims unless they get caught out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 No consent was asked for but it was still played. Isn't that disputed (at least whether there were attempts at contact)? Is that OK. Why phone a hospital at 5 in the morning to get to a patient, presumably it would have just been as funny at midday uk, but of course that wouldn't have been prime time in OZ, maybe a just a bit inconvenient for them. What was the timeline? They didn't transmit it live, did they? 5.30am would be what 4.30pm in Sydney? When was it broadcast? Were they an evening show/breakfast show or what? The other thing is when they connected a 14 year old to a lie detector, why ask a minor about their sex life. Is that OK. Were they the same DJs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts