HD Forums Australia
Home
Online: Hilly
Topics

Whistleblowers

3/6
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Quote source removed.
    Considering that its nothing more than gossip or hearsay, i would say nothing at all. The ABC is basically condoning the publication of a malicious, inaccurate  career threatening story to go ahead regardless of the absence of proof. Porters reputation has been forever tarnished by this..."The pen is mightier than the sword"  
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Chester there is no left /right or sideways agenda with me at all. This is merely a follow up from a prior posting. What is noted though is that you have clearly indicated that ABC have done this to avoid a defamation suit. If they felt that they were able to substantiate their claims they would have done so.
    May i ask why Mr Porter would not see this as a "Victory" as you put it.....or do you feel that ABC has been Victorious in this instance?



  • Jay-Dee
    Jay-Dee
    2 years ago
    And it's even more amusing how someone like yourself claims to be in the middle with no bias left or right yet you always take the side of the lefties and throw stones at someone you consider to be on the right.

    Paul and Sky aren't right wing propagandists, they're common sense and fair play propagandists, sadly something bleeding heart lefties largely know nothing about so they scream far right extremism when something doesn't align with their utopian view of how the world SHOULD work. I see SKY on occasions and although I can't cop all of their presenters, from what I see they at least try to give both sides a go and point out obvious bullshit, something that OUR ABC doesn't do.

    And for the record I wouldn't be at all surprised if Porter is guilty and the slimeball that they made him out to be, I have no axe to grind for him either way. But by your logic they've put out this statement to avoid a lawsuit yet Porter's pulled his case because he didn't have one, how does that work? Let's for a minute assume he's innocent (which unless proven otherwise, rightly or wrongly he is), how much damage has this done to him, and you're ok with that simply because you don't like him?
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Quoting Jay-Dee on 01 Jun 2021 12:47 AMedited: 01 Jun 2021 01:28 AM

    And it's even more amusing how someone like yourself claims to be in the middle with no bias left or right yet you always take the side of the lefties and throw stones at someone you consider to be on the right.


    Paul and Sky aren't right wing propagandists, they're common sense and fair play propagandists, sadly something bleeding heart lefties largely know nothing about so they scream far right extremism when something doesn't align with their utopian view of how the world SHOULD work. I see SKY on occasions and although I can't cop all of their presenters, from what I see they at least try to give both sides a go and point out obvious bullshit, something that OUR ABC doesn't do.

    And for the record I wouldn't be at all surprised if Porter is guilty and the slimeball that they made him out to be, I have no axe to grind for him either way. But by your logic they've put out this statement to avoid a lawsuit yet Porter's pulled his case because he didn't have one, how does that work? Let's for a minute assume he's innocent (which unless proven otherwise, rightly or wrongly he is), how much damage has this done to him, and you're ok with that simply because you don't like him?

    Jay Dee sadly for some people what they see in print or hear via the myriad of news, social media outlets is 100% gospel. We have now had many high profile people from sports, politics, clergy and law enforcement tried and convicted in the court of public opinion well before they have even set foot in a courtroom. Those same hysterical outraged critics then find it unpalatable to simply acknowledge their error when the person walks or sentence overturned but more importantly learn from it. As for Porter, like yourself, he may well have committed the alleged crimes, but in the absence of that fundamental core of our legal system, evidence, gives us the privilege to call it out for what it currently is, a rumor.
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    I agree that public figures should also be subject to public scrutiny, but certainly airing unsupported claims should be punished and certainly not rewarded with praise from your employer.
     The ABC did not intend to suggest that Mr Porter had committed the criminal offences alleged. The ABC did not contend that the serious accusations could be substantiated to the applicable legal standard – criminal or civil. However, both parties accept that some readers misinterpreted the article as an accusation of guilt against Mr Porter. That reading, which was not intended by the ABC, is regretted.

    Makes you wonder why they proceeded with the story in the first instance after their disclosure of the statement they gave....
  • roadrunner14
    roadrunner14
    2 years ago
    Quoting paulybronco on 01 Jun 2021 05:40 AM

    I agree that public figures should also be subject to public scrutiny, but certainly airing unsupported claims should be punished and certainly not rewarded with praise from your employer.
     The ABC did not intend to suggest that Mr Porter had committed the criminal offences alleged. The ABC did not contend that the serious accusations could be substantiated to the applicable legal standard – criminal or civil. However, both parties accept that some readers misinterpreted the article as an accusation of guilt against Mr Porter. That reading, which was not intended by the ABC, is regretted.

    Makes you wonder why they proceeded with the story in the first instance after their disclosure of the statement they gave....

    Surely it wouldn’t have anything to do with party politics 🙄 the ABC are unbiased aren’t they, truth in reporting and all that. The shoe would be on the other foot with certain other media outlets, and bias reporting toward ‘the other side’ too.  Unfortunately truth and good investigative journalism is lost in the quest for quick click bait headlines, and they can all be bought for comment/favours etc.  
    Oh I’m cynical in my old age, no wait a minute, I’ve always been cynical 😜
  • Jay-Dee
    Jay-Dee
    2 years ago
    Quoting Jay-Dee on 01 Jun 2021 12:47 AMedited: 01 Jun 2021 01:28 AM

    And it's even more amusing how someone like yourself claims to be in the middle with no bias left or right yet you always take the side of the lefties and throw stones at someone you consider to be on the right.


    Paul and Sky aren't right wing propagandists, they're common sense and fair play propagandists, sadly something bleeding heart lefties largely know nothing about so they scream far right extremism when something doesn't align with their utopian view of how the world SHOULD work. I see SKY on occasions and although I can't cop all of their presenters, from what I see they at least try to give both sides a go and point out obvious bullshit, something that OUR ABC doesn't do.

    And for the record I wouldn't be at all surprised if Porter is guilty and the slimeball that they made him out to be, I have no axe to grind for him either way. But by your logic they've put out this statement to avoid a lawsuit yet Porter's pulled his case because he didn't have one, how does that work? Let's for a minute assume he's innocent (which unless proven otherwise, rightly or wrongly he is), how much damage has this done to him, and you're ok with that simply because you don't like him?

    Quoting paulybronco on 01 Jun 2021 02:24 AM

    Jay Dee sadly for some people what they see in print or hear via the myriad of news, social media outlets is 100% gospel. We have now had many high profile people from sports, politics, clergy and law enforcement tried and convicted in the court of public opinion well before they have even set foot in a courtroom. Those same hysterical outraged critics then find it unpalatable to simply acknowledge their error when the person walks or sentence overturned but more importantly learn from it. As for Porter, like yourself, he may well have committed the alleged crimes, but in the absence of that fundamental core of our legal system, evidence, gives us the privilege to call it out for what it currently is, a rumor.

    They read/see the same shit (good or bad) that everyone else does but somehow think that they're better informed than the rest of us because their bias makes them believe it when others like you or I might treat it with a degree of suspicion. I just want the real facts reported with no slant or agenda either way, I'll make up my own mind.

    As for James' post mentioning bravery, for me the word brave gets thrown around and treated with about the same disrespect as the word legend when describing someone these days.
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Quote source removed.
     LOL You lunatic! Sorry alleged lunatic
  • Jay-Dee
    Jay-Dee
    2 years ago
    Quoting paulybronco on 01 Jun 2021 07:05 AM

     LOL You lunatic! Sorry alleged lunatic

    Ha ha, that's why I didn't quote him, I've been caught before.
  • fatbat
    fatbat
    2 years ago
    I saw the discontinued litigation and press release from the abc as a carefully considered and worded compromise by both parties to make everyone look like they’ve come out ok and saved face. 

    Some interesting comments on both sides of the fence here. I agree publicly elected officials should be held to scrutiny and account, but it’s gotta be more than the hearsay words of a deceased woman of an incident decades ago where only that deceased woman and Porter know what really happened. So I don’t know what the point of the ABC story was other than to damage reputation which their story did well at. Agree the ABC didn’t name Porter but they didn’t need to; we all know in today’s day and age that media doesn’t have to name people or entities; that becomes known via the grapevine although at far greater speed and in numbers thanks to social media and internet. So you can write a story that has enough detail that others will identify persons involved and spread it (or rely on one of the parties coming out, which occurred); and bare no responsibility. Genius eh

    Lawyers made money, the AG lost his job and has suffered significant reputational damage. There is a clear loser here irrespective of any defamation suit being discontinued. Is it really coincidental that the ABC was behind this as opposed to any of the other media outlets. Nowhere else in the world would you see the government funded broadcaster bring down the AG on the hearsay of a dead person from an incident decades ago. Amazing. Are we now all better off as a result?
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Quoting fatbat on 01 Jun 2021 07:12 AMedited: 01 Jun 2021 07:22 AM

    I saw the discontinued litigation and press release from the abc as a carefully considered and worded compromise by both parties to make everyone look like they’ve come out ok and saved face. 


    Some interesting comments on both sides of the fence here. I agree publicly elected officials should be held to scrutiny and account, but it’s gotta be more than the hearsay words of a deceased woman of an incident decades ago where only that deceased woman and Porter know what really happened. So I don’t know what the point of the ABC story was other than to damage reputation which their story did well at. Agree the ABC didn’t name Porter but they didn’t need to; we all know in today’s day and age that media doesn’t have to name people or entities; that becomes known via the grapevine although at far greater speed and in numbers thanks to social media and internet. So you can write a story that has enough detail that others will identify persons involved and spread it (or rely on one of the parties coming out, which occurred); and bare no responsibility. Genius eh

    Lawyers made money, the AG lost his job and has suffered significant reputational damage. There is a clear loser here irrespective of any defamation suit being discontinued. Is it really coincidental that the ABC was behind this as opposed to any of the other media outlets. Nowhere else in the world would you see the government funded broadcaster bring down the AG on the hearsay of a dead person from an incident decades ago. Amazing. Are we now all better off as a result?

    Brilliant summary of the events. The question really is who put the ABC up to do the story, and  that is where the real story is.
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Then head back to those posts...this one is called "Whistleblowers"....moer
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Umm just because he doesn't fit into the complicit woman friendly box shouldn't be a reason....it should be his bosses job to pull him into line, not some self righteous female journo. I might just mention that she was also the instigator of George Pell investigation. I have no love for either player here but natural justice, or duty to act fairly has to be adhered to for justice to prevail. Neither where afforded that.
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    Rather than cryptic be specific...my interpretation of his past was that he was not particularly viewed as being "Female friendly" in his views and behaviors. Do you have anything extra that may sway that view.....
  • roadrunner14
    roadrunner14
    2 years ago
    And why do some whistleblower stories get more attention than others, oh yeah, this
    55F5190F-24FE-4124-9FE4-4ECD3934C16B.jpeg
  • paulybronco
    paulybronco
    2 years ago
    I would put forward that the term for his situation would be "the aggrieved"
  • fatbat
    fatbat
    2 years ago
    Freelance journalist Claire Keenan is reporting today that the start of this shit fight was “the letter was written by friends of the (deceased) woman, and had originally been sent to Penny Wong and Sarah Hanson-Young”. 
  • steelo
    steelo
    2 years ago
    I must confess I don't understand why some members after going to the trouble of drafting out a cogent and reasonably thought out post, very quickly delete them.
    I have been known to do it in the past where I didn't make any sense, was a dickhead or have caused offense. As a general rule, I now let my comments stand.
    It does sometimes make following a discussion thread difficult.
Topics
3/6