Australian Politics Forum - Right of reply

Phemanderac Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 3507 Gender:	Right of reply Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:28pm http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1396490825 It's ok, it seemed appropriate to afford the journalist who originally wrote this article a right of reply regarding how his words were changed. Consequently I forwarded it to him and some of his press council colleagues.
Back to top	On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day... "They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean.. IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38851
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #1 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:54pm

Phemanderac wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:28pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1396490825

It's ok, it seemed appropriate to afford the journalist who originally wrote this article a right of reply regarding how his words were changed. Consequently I forwarded it to him and some of his press council colleagues.

I wish you had not. I have already referred this to FD via PM. It would be preferable not to draw crabs from outside surely, and allow FD an opportunity to deal with it here first.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 5:03pm by Aussie »

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #2 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 5:02pm

Phemanderac wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:28pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1396490825

It's ok, it seemed appropriate to afford the journalist who originally wrote this article a right of reply regarding how his words were changed. Consequently I forwarded it to him and some of his press council colleagues.

Bitch move.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #3 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 5:05pm

Aussie wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:54pm:

Phemanderac wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:28pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1396490825

It's ok, it seemed appropriate to afford the journalist who originally wrote this article a right of reply regarding how his words were changed. Consequently I forwarded it to him and some of his press council colleagues.

I wish you had not. I have already referred this to FD via PM. It would be preferable not to draw crabs from outside surely, and allow FD an opportunity to deal with it here first.

The original author whose work was doctored is hardly a "crab" mate.

As to handling stuff internally, let's face it there are the written rules of the place and then the reality of the place and, basically, both are in alternate universes...

You cannot expect to doctor someone's professional work and expect a get out of gaol free card.

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38851
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #4 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 5:14pm

Quote:

As to handling stuff internally, let's face it there are the written rules of the place and then the reality of the place and, basically, both are in alternate universes...

I checked, There is a gap in the Rules/Policies. This is not covered therein by oversight, one hardly surprising given it is not within reasonable foreseeability that a Member would go to such lengths to forge, and deliberately misquote an original work of a published journalist.

The far better and preferable course for you as a Member here interested in the welfare of the Forum would have been to refer it to FD....(as I did) before running off to Press Council people (i.e. 'crabs.')

But.....the milk is spilled now.

Back to top

IP Logged

Neferti

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female

Re: Right of reply
Reply #5 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 5:31pm

Aussie wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 5:14pm:

Quote:

As to handling stuff internally, let's face it there are the written rules of the place and then the reality of the place and, basically, both are in alternate universes...

I checked, There is a gap in the Rules/Policies. This is not covered therein by oversight, one hardly surprising given it is not within reasonable foreseeability that a Member would go to such lengths to forge, and deliberately misquote an original work of a published journalist.

The far better and preferable course for you as a Member here interested in the welfare of the Forum would have been to refer it to FD....(as I did) before running off to Press Council people (i.e. 'crabs.')

But.....the milk is spilled now

.

Back to top

IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #6 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 6:04pm

Let's get a couple of things straight.

Firstly, I made a call (decision). I made that call based on the right thing to do based on my personal values, as such, I make no apology for bringing the doctoring of someone else's work to that person's attention.

As to there not being a specific rule, there should not need to be one, there is no grey area in this issue, it is simply wrong.

Further, it seems that the rules that are written are not consistently or applied in any semblance of an even handed fashion. That may simply reflect human nature, I get that. However, if rules become merely arbitrary in their application, then the idea behind the rules is immediately lost.

Anyone know why rules are put in place in the first place?

Secondly, I demonstrated a degree of integrity otherwise unfamiliar in this place, I put my hand up and declared what I did. I could have taken action, not said a word and waited. If or when a response occurred I would suggest there would have been no end of discussion, accusation and speculation as to who did this thing. I daresay that after much whaling and gnashing of teeth someone may even have been scape goated. To my mind, that would have therefore been a gutless and inappropriate act.

Finally, let us not forget, I am not the poster who made the decision to change a professionals words.... That is kind of an important factor in this. Let's face it, consider what possible actions admin could take and tell me how even the most extreme response from admin would have amounted to anything more than sweeping this action under the carpet.

I make no apology.

Now, how it is handled beyond this will be demonstrative of the "care for the board" that is floating around....

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38851
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #7 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 6:21pm

Phemanderac wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 6:04pm:

Let's get a couple of things straight.

Firstly, I made a call (decision). I made that call based on the right thing to do based on my personal values, as such, I make no apology for bringing the doctoring of someone else's work to that person's attention.

Yeas ~ a judgment call. I abhor what AP did as much as you do. The difference between us is the method adopted to deal with it.

Quote:

As to there not being a specific rule, there should not need to be one, there is no grey area in this issue, it is simply wrong.

I agree 100%. But, you can bet that AP will plead that there is no Rule. Such a plea would not work with me, and obviously, not with you either.

Quote:

Further, it seems that the rules that are written are not consistently or applied in any semblance of an even handed fashion. That may simply reflect human nature, I get that. However, if rules become merely arbitrary in their application, then the idea behind the rules is immediately lost.

Anyone know why rules are put in place in the first place?

I'm not going there.

Quote:

Secondly, I demonstrated a degree of integrity otherwise unfamiliar in this place, I put my hand up and declared what I did. I could have taken action, not said a word and waited. If or when a response occurred I would suggest there would have been no end of discussion, accusation and speculation as to who did this thing. I daresay that after much whaling and gnashing of teeth someone may even have been scape goated. To my mind, that would have therefore been a gutless and inappropriate act.

Yeas, all good. However, I will be just as forthright in saying that you missed taking the first most obvious option.

Quote:

Finally, let us not forget, I am not the poster who made the decision to change a professionals words.... That is kind of an important factor in this. Let's face it, consider what possible actions admin could take and tell me how even the most extreme response from admin would have amounted to anything more than sweeping this action under the carpet.

I make no apology.

This is an immediate issue for OzPol.....not the wider community. Objection to what AP did is quite clear and in open here. You ought to have seen that. But, you've done what you've done. It would have been just as easy for you to complain to FD, and make it plain here that you had so complained, and your integrity would remain intact. If you were then unhappy with how FD handled it....sure, an obvious next step is what you chose as your first step.

Quote:

Now, how it is handled beyond this will be demonstrative of the "care for the board" that is floating around....

Yeas, true. But, instead of giving FD a chance to sort it out, you went straight over his head...........knowingly attracting crabs.

It is not always necessary to go straight for the jugular, first.

Anyway, spilled milk now.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49403
At my desk.

Re: Right of reply
Reply #8 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:20pm

It is not an oversight. This sort of thing has been considered before. There is no rule about it because I am not going to police it. Phemanderac was reasonable to bypass me as I would have taken no action. I have no problem with people inviting the author on here, though I doubt he would bother joining up. It was good for Phemanderac to let me know that he did this, in case there are legal consequences (I don't think there are in this case). I also have no problem with him starting the thread on feedback instead of informing me via PM, as I welcome people's opinion on this issue. This is not an open invitation to use feedback for drama queening - I think he made the right call.

Never heard the term crab in this context before.

IMO, simply pointing out the deception is the appropriate way to deal with it. I remember one of our ex-resident Muslims did something like that to an article also.

Quote:

As to there not being a specific rule, there should not need to be one, there is no grey area in this issue, it is simply wrong.

As a member of this forum, you have a right to be wrong.

Quote:

Further, it seems that the rules that are written are not consistently or applied in any semblance of an even handed fashion.

They are applied when breaches are reported via PM.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38851 Gender:	Re: Right of reply Reply #9 - Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:20pm Quote: I think he made the right call. Okay. I now understand. 1. No point going to you first, AiA. 2. With your blessing AiA, straight to ACMA and whatever other Government Mob might be interested. Glad we have cleared that up. Abject apologies Phemanderac, you were right.
Back to top	IP Logged

AiA

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 18405
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #10 - Apr 4^th, 2014 at 2:44am

Aussie wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:20pm:

Quote:

I think he made the right call.

Okay. I now understand.

1. No point going to you first, AiA.

2. With your blessing AiA, straight to ACMA and whatever other Government Mob might be interested.

Glad we have cleared that up.

Abject apologies Phemanderac, you were right.

Went back and read the rules and it seems Aussie is due for a suspension from this fine board ^^^. Mods?

Back to top

“Jerry, just remember: It’s not a lie … if you believe it.” George Costanza

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 23818 Carlsbad, CA Gender:	Re: Right of reply Reply #11 - Apr 4^th, 2014 at 2:48am What rule has Aussie breached there?
Back to top	Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde IP Logged

AiA Gold Member Offline Posts: 18405 Gender:	Re: Right of reply Reply #12 - Apr 4^th, 2014 at 2:59am Andrei.Hicks wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 2:48am: What rule has Aussie breached there? Slander. Do you not see aussie has substituted "FD" with "AiA?" I bugger all to do with this thread sir.
Back to top	“Jerry, just remember: It’s not a lie … if you believe it.” George Costanza IP Logged

mantra Gold Member Offline ozpolitic.com Posts: 10750 Gender:	Re: Right of reply Reply #13 - Apr 4^th, 2014 at 4:18am Take your own advice and ignore it or report Aussie to the ACMA.
Back to top	IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38851
Gender: male

Re: Right of reply
Reply #14 - Apr 4^th, 2014 at 6:23am

Aussie wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:20pm:

Quote:

I think he made the right call.

Okay. I now understand.

1. No point going to you first, AiA.

2. With your blessing AiA, straight to ACMA and whatever other Government Mob might be interested.

Glad we have cleared that up.

Abject apologies Phemanderac, you were right.

Freudian slip. Where I have typed AiA, it should have been FD.

Back to top

IP Logged