I think it's quite an interesting situation. I'd like some questions answered by a someone qualified to answer these question, to provide a bit of insight, if it's okay.
What is the law on prank calling Australian hospitals? That'd set the DJ's expectations.
Suicide is common with our media, it regularly hounds people to death or breakdown - is the Australian press different?
More general questions:
If the expectation was not to get information - why not stage the prank with actors - why phone the hospital?
As for the blame and acrimony, I find them to be impediments to accepting responsibility; and personally the sooner people figure out their own roles in the whole thing the sooner things get better for them - as for the rest of us, it's our daily distraction.
That's a crass and insensitive statement even by your standards.Originally Posted by SeriousCat
The DJs worked for 2Day FM which is a commercial business. The prank was dreamt up by the production team and merely executed by the DJs. The whole point was to try and publicly humiliate the nursing staff and the Duchess [had they been put through] and by doing so boost their ratings and increase the station's advertising revenue.
Under Australian broadcasting law they could undertake the prank call, but they needed permission from the nurses to broadcast. The station claims it asked for permission [denied by the hospital] and then broadcast anyway. The decision to broadcast was not taken by the DJs. They are only guilty of being the public face of the prank, as they made the call, and posting some tasteless Tweets directed at the nurses.
The MD of the station refused to apologise properly, and what we are now seeing is a public hate campaign unfairly directed at the DJs, when it should be directed at their employers. He also kept the prank on air when it should have been pulled. The MD is now attempting to deflect criticism of his struggling radio station by putting his beleaguered DJs on TV in the hope they will elicit a massive sympathy vote in Australia. Max Clifford would be proud.
You can never be sure how people will react to a prank and there is plenty of evidence that people subjected to worldwide humiliation via YouTube, Facebook and Twitter react badly. There have been plenty of suicides caused by such a public humiliation.
In this case a company put it's commercial interests before the welfare of its staff and the possible impact of such a prank on the intended target. To say they couldn't have seen it happen is also crass - they should have thought through all the worst case possible scenarios. Whilst they might not have foreseen suicide it could have resulted in someone losing their job or been disciplined, but since the company has previous form in this area I doubt they cared.
yes - it is both crass and insensitive - it would be great it we could add "untrue" to the list of sins but unfortunately we cant
entirely unrealistic - do you always avoid doing something if the worst case scenario involves someone dying? do you drive to the shops? do you walk to the shops? do you buy some bacon in the shops?In this case a company put it's commercial interests before the welfare of its staff and the possible impact of such a prank on the intended target. To say they couldn't have seen it happen is also crass - they should have thought through all the worst case possible scenarios. Whilst they might not have foreseen suicide it could have resulted in someone losing their job or been disciplined, but since the company has previous form in this area I doubt they cared.
who cares about that parasite? If she had manned up and not been in hospital with morning sickness, this wouldnt have happened and that poor nurse would still be alive
I think serious cat is having a stroke or is pissed...either that or emperor fab has hacked his account
'My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic'
Are you serious?
Can you read? I wrote they couldn't have foreseen the suicide in question, but they didn't think through any of the potential consequences [quote from DJs].
However, when I drive to the shops I do so in a way in which I try to limit the risk [keeping to speed limits, driving really slowly past schools when the kids are coming out .. common sense things]. And I work in the media and communications sector. On a recent project that might impact on the job prospects of low paid workers the comms team did look at the worst case scenario - someone committing sucide - and took professional advice and set-up a dedicated hotline in conjunction with a key trade union.
In this case the station could have spoken to the nurses and asked if it was OK to broadcast - simple. The fault lies with the company not the DJs.
none of the above - see if you can pinpoint why you think that (im fairly sure i already know)
Cause you're coming across as pissed or having a stroke or a douche bag?
'My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic'
that has no bearing on my comment - im sure they could have foreseen a possible suicide from any number of people involved - but there is such a low likelihood that they dismissed it - just as we do with everything that we do
when you set up your dedicated hotline and professional advice stuff did you then think that a suicide was no longer possible or did you just think "we have made a bit of an effort - lets just take the risk now"?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote