Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVI

[Zach Package]

You give the journalists too much credit.

If I run this story, I set up a a pretty brutal cross examination of those I'm getting the story from. Its done to protect those involved.

The story run indicates that has almost certainly not taken place.

Well the good news is that it’s a Russell Jackson article and the bloke has an unimpeachable track record to this point, so you can be confident that’s already done.

 

[Phone]

You give the journalists too much credit.

If I run this story, I set up a a pretty brutal cross examination of those I'm getting the story from. Its done to protect those involved.

The story run indicates that has almost certainly not taken place.

well yeah, but this would make you an incredibly unsuccessful publisher/journalist (as the story would leak the moment you set-up the cross examination and they try to get out in front of it) and no-one would ever give you the story

 

[The Devils Advocate]

Alastair Clarkson has issued a passionate response to the bombshell allegations of his treatment of First Nations players and their families during his time at Hawthorn.



So basically, Clarkson saying they all lied. The sweeping under the rug begins.

I'm sure that when the truth comes out, he will be in a very, very good position.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

I'm sure that when the truth comes out, he will be in a very, very good position.

Let's not even try and draw parallels to peptide taking and forced abortion please.

 

[Bjchan13]

well yeah, but this would make you an incredibly unsuccessful publisher/journalist (as the story would leak the moment you set-up the cross examination and they try to get out in front of it) and no-one would ever give you the story

How is the story leaking by cross examining the people making the claims?

 

[The Devils Advocate]

Let's not even try and draw parallels to peptide taking and forced abortion please.

I'm not. Lol

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

I'm not. Lol

My mistake then, apologies.

EDIT - Re-reading this made it sound sarcastic to me, I meant it sincerely.

 

[Phone]

How is the story leaking by cross examining the people making the claims?

if you say you want to make an appointment to ask questions about this and that about a story on (topic x) but that you actually won't run the story until we have this meeting, all that will happen is the side on the receiving end will start mapping out runs to control the story with friendly voices ("they're just disgruntled players!" "this is is what actually happened") or just straight up come out with it themselves (like the "and...he just...he tweeted it out." case)

no media organisation would ever actually not publish until a successful "pretty brutal cross examination" because they would like to actually publish the story. in this story, like nearly every other story, detailed questions were submitted to the people involved with a deadline for publication. ("ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded.") it seems they choose not to respond. we don't know the deadline, it might have been ridiculously short, but the reality is nearly every other publication would do the same because choosing to sit on the story runs the risk of the story being broken elsewhere.

 

[Mikevk123]

One thing I really question is how any club can have that sort of authority (First Nation people aside) on anyone.

Controlling peoples relationships and manipulation in the highest order. Why didn’t any of players call it out? Surely someone would have been alert to what was happening.

 

[Eleven 38]

Just read Clarksons statement, he doesn't actually deny what he's accused of saying, just says he refutes misconduct or wrongdoing

So its possible he believes what he said to be the right thing to say to the player/players.

 

[Bjchan13]

if you say you want to make an appointment to ask questions about this and that about a story on (topic x) but that you actually won't run the story until we have this meeting, all that will happen is the side on the receiving end will start mapping out runs to control the story with friendly voices ("they're just disgruntled players!" "this is is what actually happened") or just straight up come out with it themselves (like the "and...he just...he tweeted it out." case)

no media organisation would ever actually not publish until a successful "pretty brutal cross examination" because they would like to actually publish the story. in this story, like nearly every other story, detailed questions were submitted to the people involved with a deadline for publication. ("ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded.") it seems they choose not to respond. we don't know the deadline, it might have been ridiculously short, but the reality is nearly every other publication would do the same because choosing to sit on the story runs the risk of the story being broken elsewhere.

I think you misread the original post from bruno that you quoted. Cross examining Clarkson or Fagan was never mentioned. It was cross examining the players making the claims. You'd hope the journalist would do that before releasing the story no?

 

[SydneyBomber]

Just read Clarksons statement, he doesn't actually deny what he's accused of saying, just says he refutes misconduct or wrongdoing

So its possible he believes what he said to be the right thing to say to the player/players.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

if you say you want to make an appointment to ask questions about this and that about a story on (topic x) but that you actually won't run the story until we have this meeting, all that will happen is the side on the receiving end will start mapping out runs to control the story with friendly voices ("they're just disgruntled players!" "this is is what actually happened") or just straight up come out with it themselves (like the "and...he just...he tweeted it out." case)

no media organisation would ever actually not publish until a successful "pretty brutal cross examination" because they would like to actually publish the story. in this story, like nearly every other story, detailed questions were submitted to the people involved with a deadline for publication. ("ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded.") it seems they choose not to respond. we don't know the deadline, it might have been ridiculously short, but the reality is nearly every other publication would do the same because choosing to sit on the story runs the risk of the story being broken elsewhere.

This story has been worked on by the ABC for 5 months. Given the detail and who the journalist is, let alone the publisher, significant fact checking will have taken place. Consent from the complainants to cross reference clinic records, emails etc will have taken place if consent was given and if it wasn't, red flags will have been raised by legal. I know an experienced journalist at the ABC and I have heard what's required to get something like this published.




Side Note: No response from the accused is also very interesting. Why would they not want to refute the claims then and there and why would they seem like they're shocked with the allegations today? Proving the attempted contact by the ABC would be easy. It's interesting that they would have known this story is coming and their responses have been almost identical, almost co-ordinated.

 

[Albertross]

What a disgusting story! It baffles me as to how these events could be at the forefront of someone's mind, no matter the race of the people they were directed at. The fact that they seem to be only directed at the Indigenous players, that adds a whole extra racist layer to the story.

Could anyone imagine going into work tomorrow and announcing that your wife is expecting, only for your boss to tell you to abort the pregnancy and leave your wife. Wouldn't happen.

Clearly there is still a major racism issue within the AFL. With the recent stories surrounding the Pies, Tex being a racist flog and now this, the AFL need to conduct a league wide review as to how clubs treat, not just the Indigenous players, but also those from other ethnic backgrounds.

We copped our fair whack from the AFL for how we treated our players, these events are on a whole new level though and if the AFL are serious about stamping out racism, then the consequences for those found to be at fault need to be the most severe the sport has ever seen.

 

[BrunoV]

Honestly, what a load of shit. It just becomes a race to self flagellate as though that makes any difference.

People are imperfect, stuff is going to be said. It sucks but Taylor Walker is not the last person who is going to make a mistake.

There are allegations that a club was reinstituting the stolen generation and now its a reflection on us?

I'll wear the brutalisation of the permanent displacement of colonialism but not this.

I mustn't have gotten the full text of the ratial tolerance memo because I didn't see any room for separating indigenous guys from their families as being something that was okay.

 

[Bjchan13]

This story has been worked on by the ABC for 5 months. Given the detail and who the journalist is, let alone the publisher, significant fact checking will have taken place. Consent from the complainants to cross reference clinic records, emails etc will have taken place if consent was given and if it wasn't, red flags will have been raised by legal. I know an experienced journalist at the ABC and I have heard what's required to get something like this published.




Side Note: No response from the accused is also very interesting. Why would they not want to refute the claims then and there and why would they seem like they're shocked with the allegations today? Proving the attempted contact by the ABC would be easy. It's interesting that they would have known this story is coming and their responses have been almost identical, almost co-ordinated.

I just hope that all this due diligence was definitely done because if theres one thing you know about Clarko, it is that he will turn this into a dirty scrap. At the moment all we have is 3 unamed players say this happened. Clarko says it didnt. I already believe the players version of events but it will have to be proved also to make it stick properly.

 

[Phone]

I think you misread the original post from bruno that you quoted. Cross examining Clarkson or Fagan was never mentioned. It was cross examining the players making the claims. You'd hope the journalist would do that before releasing the story no?

Ah indeed I have. But nevertheless it's on the same wave length of no publisher would actually go that deep into it for risk of losing the story anyway, to me. (so back to my first post of "well you wouldn't be very successful"). The publisher is not a court and their focus would be on gathering multiple sources, doing checking on the things they're stating (do you have proof of this and that, etc which is somewhat referenced in the article itself with the notes of emails in the second case study) and then the lawyers going through each line to ensure that defamation risk is cleaned. they'd wouldn't go about it in a brutal way because they risk losing the story.

 

[The Donners]

As most of you have said, and rightfully so, this is the worst allegations in the AFL history. I truly wish this hasn’t happened as alleged and I hope it hasn’t happened at other clubs.

Those responsible should be heavily sanctioned if guilty as charged.

It’s just a game. My eyes are welling up thinking about the young footballer and his partner.

 

[dank420_]

Honestly, what a load of s**t. It just becomes a race to self flagellate as though that makes any difference.

People are imperfect, stuff is going to be said. It sucks but Taylor Walker is not the last person who is going to make a mistake.

There are allegations that a club was reinstituting the stolen generation and now its a reflection on us?

I'll wear the brutalisation of the permanent displacement of colonialism but not this.

I mustn't have gotten the full text of the ratial tolerance memo because I didn't see any room for separating indigenous guys from their families as being something that was okay.

You taking this personally is hilarious. Not surprising in the slightest either. Take the day off posting ffs.

 

[rumply]

Honestly, what a load of s**t. It just becomes a race to self flagellate as though that makes any difference.

People are imperfect, stuff is going to be said. It sucks but Taylor Walker is not the last person who is going to make a mistake.

There are allegations that a club was reinstituting the stolen generation and now its a reflection on us?

I'll wear the brutalisation of the permanent displacement of colonialism but not this.

I mustn't have gotten the full text of the ratial tolerance memo because I didn't see any room for separating indigenous guys from their families as being something that was okay.

Hmmm, what a sheltered existence you have lived.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

I just hope that all this due diligence was definitely done because if theres one thing you know about Clarko, it is that he will turn this into a dirty scrap. At the moment all we have is 3 unamed players say this happened. Clarko says it didnt. I already believe the players version of events but it will have to be proved also to make it stick properly.

Given the journalist's history, the publication and the gravity of the allegations, from what I know it certainly would have.

 

[boncer34]

Just thinking about North for a moment. IF Clarko is gone.

Do Logue, Hill and whoever else they've talked to still come?

 

[Dave]

One thing I really question is how any club can have that sort of authority (First Nation people aside) on anyone.

Controlling peoples relationships and manipulation in the highest order. Why didn’t any of players call it out? Surely someone would have been alert to what was happening.

They were kids, they didn't want to risk their dreams.

 

[Bjchan13]

Ah indeed I have. But nevertheless it's on the same wave length of no publisher would actually go that deep into it for risk of losing the story anyway, to me. (so back to my first post of "well you wouldn't be very successful"). The publisher is not a court and their focus would be on gathering multiple sources, doing checking on the things they're stating (do you have proof of this and that, etc which is somewhat referenced in the article itself with the notes of emails in the second case study) and then the lawyers going through each line to ensure that defamation risk is cleaned. they'd wouldn't go about it in a brutal way because they risk losing the story.

I think the only issue you have in brunos original post is the use of the word brutal. Thorough due diligence we all agree on i think. You dont throw the story out there without some form of cross examination/questioning of their version of events, as you leave them wide open to it from Clarksons people. You also risk your reputation as a journalist.

 

[citizen-erased]

Eddie Betts