Comments on: Kyle and Jackie O’s live lie detector test goes very wrong

By: Bullmore's Ghost

Bullmore's Ghost — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 05:50:28 +0000

RaymondChurch wrote: “Hardly the actions of a dilligent, professional public watchdog. More like a sleeping pussy.”

… or worse. How about sycophantic supporter. Who could ever forget this from the then Chairman of the ABA:

‘Dear Alan, You have an extraordinary ability of capturing and enunciating the opinions of the majority on so many issues. This of course annoys those who have a different agenda. I suspect it is extremely irritating to them that you do it so well … Keep up your considerable contribution to the widening of our national debates. Sincerely, David.’
-David Flint letter to Alan Jones, June 11 1999

By: Bullmore's Ghost

Bullmore's Ghost — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 05:42:23 +0000

Ben wrote: “What I want to know is where were the lawyers in all of this? How on Earth did Kyle and Jackie O get clearance to put the girl on air in the first place? What happened to due diligence?”

That question crossed my mind briefly, too. The output of any broadcaster reflects the attitudes of its management. When you consider the crap that passes for radio these days, why would any station manager have the presence of mind to bother with a legal opinion — until he or she is being sued after the event. The management is as clueless as its employees.

As the old saying goes: The fish rots from the head.

By: RaymondChurch

RaymondChurch — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:19:07 +0000

ACMA in the past have never been known to investigate anything unless there is a hellava big noise being made. When was the last time they got off their backsides and actually initiated action. It took Media Watch to get anything done about Laws and Jones. In this current side show, from ringmaster Sandilands and his assistant, it wasn’t until the outrage expressed by thousands of Australians in blogs and on talkback and then the media generally that ACMA invited complaints to them and they would look into the affair. Hardly the actions of a dilligent, professional public watchdog. More like a sleeping pussy.

By: HellsBells

HellsBells — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 13:30:03 +0000

From ACMA’s website today:
‘ACMA to investigate adequacy of community safeguards for live-hosted entertainment programs on commercial radio’.

Reports on their earlier exploits reveal the content of K & JO’s morning squalfest routinely violated Codes of Practice 1, 2 and 6 developed by Commercial Radio Australia well before their latest appalling stunt.

Apparently, ACMA’s responsibilities include:
- promoting self-regulation and competition in the communications industry, while protecting consumers and other users
- fostering an environment in which electronic media respect community standards and respond to audience and user needs.

ACMA could perhaps investigate their own lack of response to Austereo’s lack of respect for what could be hoped are reasonable community standards.

By: andy egg

andy egg — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:44:05 +0000

I watched The Fisher King by Terry Gilliam on video (!) sunday and was struck by the uncanny similarities between the the predicament of the movie’s protagonist Jack Lucas(Jeff Bridges) and our Kyle. Thought you might have the connections to get a message to Kyle to watch it. I thought that might help save Kyle from Jack Lucas’s kind of protracted suffering. And that we could get Kyle out hunting for the Holy Grail, before he has to wander the streets of Sydney Town (with a bad pony tail and a Pinnochio doll) looking for redemption.

By: Pat

Pat — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:19:26 +0000

There is some hope, with the exception of a few unusual comments, everyone seems completely revolted and horrified by these events.
We have to as a society stand up for those unable to protect themselves.
We must protest loudly like we do here and tell these radio executives that this is NOT what we want to hear. We do not want to see people humiliated and degraded.
Never accept this rubbish quietly.
Everyone-have a nice day!

By: Venise Alstergren

Venise Alstergren — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 04:34:40 +0000

After a brief eight hours in hospital with a dental problem, I’m reading the above comments with interest.
STIOFAN: You are one V sicko sicko. You appear to go through life looking for evil, then you have the nerve to shout Eureka when you find it. Hopefully you don’t advise anyone on the arts front.
I am quite revolted that anyone would have subjected this girl to this form of torture. However, who really stood to gain from this nauseating performance. 1) The audience? This is the sort of audience who would happily listen to dog-fighting; that would find this sort of behaviour unremarkable speaks for itself. 2) The program producers, the stars? If they can be called that-read 1). The producers-read 1). The company which owns the station-read 1).
3)The child-would rather be dead.
4) The mother? = her fifteen minutes of fame.
NOW, with the exception of the lovely STIOFAN, WE can all throw-up!

By: anne edwards

anne edwards — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:18:55 +0000

i once called the station manager at 2day fm to complain about a segment on the same show (forced to listen to in a taxi) where a young girl phoned her father to say that she wasnt coming to stay with him for the holidays because she had been offered tickets to a concert (pink co-incidently). the offer for the tickets was ON CONDITION that she phone her father with that news live on radio. the poor man was absolutely gutted. the station manager (or his delegate) told me that the target audience was 15 and that kids that age have a different moral perspective from us 0ldies. i asked if he had children himself and if he could imagine how he would feel to have that done. he conceded that it may not have been in the best possible taste but didnt seem to ‘get’ that just because a 15yo might think that something like that was entertaining, it didnt absolve the adults producing from moral blame. i did also wonder at the time how Pink - who seems quite sensible in interviews - would feel about being indirectly linked to these awful stunts

By: Ben Aveling

Ben Aveling — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 04:19:52 +0000

Statistically, the most common offender in child abuse is a live-in boyfriend, not related to the child. We don’t know if that is the case here, in fact, we don’t know anything. Allegations are just that, and lie detectors are notoriously unreliable. Also, statistically, a small minority of mothers put their own interests before the interests of the child, to the extent of supporting the offender against the victim - blaming the victim for causing trouble. Also note the mother’s follow up question: it was not ‘who did it’, which suggests to me that she already knew. It also raises a thought - clearly she was prepared to have this raised publicly. If she was protecting the culprit, she isn’t any more. But again, we don’t really know anything about anything, only what has been said.

By: Heathdon McGregor

Heathdon McGregor — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:52:54 +0000

After a couple of days of thinking “how could the mother do this?” I am now wondering what could drive a mother to agree to this? Perhaps the parents have tried other thigns and this is a last resort. I dont have kids so I can only imagine how hard it could be to manage a young lady who has become sexually active/aware at an age younger than I expect?

I dont have a clue what happened but I wouldn’t know what to do in this situation. Could it have been a last resort?

Any how I hope the family can get help and get over this awful incident all round.

As has been referred to before Where was the delay?

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:06:47 +0000

What I want to know is where were the lawyers in all of this? How on Earth did Kyle and Jackie O get clearance to put the girl on air in the first place? What happened to due diligence?

As others have noted here and elsewhere, even the initially “planned” segment of questioning a 14-year-old girl about sex and drug use on air raises questions of legality. So why wasn’t the segment vetted by the station’s legal team?

By: Berenice Roberts

Berenice Roberts — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:49:28 +0000

Regardless of the revelations from the CHILD. And regardless of whether one beleives the hosts ‘handled it well’ or not. Who for a second thought questioning a CHILD about sexual behaviour on a radio program for fun was a good idea? Every adult involved in this decision from the producers of the show to the parents need to seriously look at themselves! I am the parent of two teenagers and could not and would not ever offer them up to be bait for such mindless drivel. Disgraceful.

By: Chris Johnson

Chris Johnson — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:01:05 +0000

The pair are producing little more than radio porn by pedalling topics normally viewed as obscene, objectionable and unfit for print or television. Because the radio station is allowing them to abuse public airwaves it should lose its licence.

By: Heathdon McGregor

Heathdon McGregor — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 02:22:28 +0000

Stilgherrian

Sorry it came up as a reply to me

By: Stilgherrian

Stilgherrian — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:51:39 +0000

@Heathdon McGregor: I was referring to me as the troll, actually.

By: Heathdon McGregor

Heathdon McGregor — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:47:57 +0000

Dear Stilgherrian

I thought a troll is someone who turns up at a website on the odd occassion to insult without any relevance the posters. I don’t believe I do that. I try to ask questions using stating what I believe so that if people believe I am wrong then I can be corrected with eveidence. I read crikey daily and comment when something catches my eye. I’m sorry that I dont understand symbols(words are good enough for me) so I believe your tongue was in your cheek. I think it is as destructive to a debate to accuse people of being a troll just because they dont share their views.

Have a nice day

By: jeebus

jeebus — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:39:35 +0000

What shocked me most was the mother’s complete betrayal of her child. To coerce her daughter onto a national radio show in order to interrogate her about sexual activity is bad enough, but to do so knowing her daughter had been raped, and never received counseling… This is disgusting neglect. The poor girl should be taken into foster care by guardians who are fit to raise her.

As for Kyle and Jackie O, it’s clear they have abused the responsibility that comes with a national broadcasting platform, and their contracts should be terminated.

By: MissAmande

MissAmande — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:36:33 +0000

I feel so sorry for the young girl in the radio interview. I can’t that the mother knew about the rape, and had not gotten any help for her daughter. And then, subjected her to more abuse by forcing her to re-live it live on air. She was more concerned about her daughter sleeping around, than whether she was recovering from sexual assault. A positive thing is that at least the daughter is finally getting some help. It’s also plainly obvious that the mother should too.
As for the radio show, this kind of rot exists because people listen to it. The segement existed because people like to hear about others get humilated, and now it’s gone too far…

By: juancampana

juancampana — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:30:10 +0000

Smithers

Bring me the company gun

By: Liz45

Liz45 — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:07:16 +0000

Stiofan - There’s one big difference here - this girl was raped. Her mother knew it, and yet she allowed this grilling to go ahead. Why hadn’t she taken her daughter to a doctor, the police, a rape crisis centre, to see a counsellor etc. It’s just appalling, and if you don’t think it is and you have kids, I suggest you do some serious reading about the expoitation/sexual abuse of children, and how to protect them! The mother in question is beyond understanding. It was another assault on this young girl, and her mother was the perpetrator this time. I’m appalled and disgusted!
Mind you, I’m not impressed with the rest of the media playing that so-called interview again!

By: Ben Aveling

Ben Aveling — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:14:55 +0000

Some points to Jackie O for a partial recovery. Minus several million points to Kyle, to the lawyers who allowed any minor to be put in that position, and to the ‘mother’. I hate to imagine reasons why she might have knowingly done what she did.

Full points to the daughter for standing up for herself in an dreadful situation - she comes across as the sanest person in what is an incredibly insane scenario.

PS. I believe live radio normally works on a delay in the order of 7 seconds, enough to cut out a swear word or sudden outburst - not much use in a situation like this.

By: Pamela

Pamela — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 10:51:10 +0000

This is just too much. I have been increasingly concerned at the brutality of TV shows denigrating people who are too fat/ can’t sing/dance /cook and any other human activity they can fail. Now I hear that radio is doing the same thing.
Why do we watch this horrible rubbish?
Why do so many Australians enjoy seeing people hurt and distressed?
Why do the media finding exploitation so lucrative and so exciting?
What parent would put her child on show to hurt and harm in this way?
What parent would ignore the fact that her child had disclosed being raped at 12 years old as nothing?
I hope that Childrens services are interviewing this mother and acquainting her with the facts of life, love and caring for a chilkd?
So what is next for Australians lust for shock horror and pain- shall we watch teenagers suicide for thrills?
So civilization goes from watching Christians being torn apart by lions to modern day Australia where cruelty and brutality are spectator sports.

By: jacks

jacks — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:57:05 +0000

That mother is a bitch and should have her child taken off her

By: Keda Ley

Keda Ley — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:28:31 +0000

It is child abuse pure and simple to subject a 14 year old to public questioning about personal issues. Where is the legal consent? This is only compounded by the nature of the answer given, and the implications arising. The child was clearly distressed.These people (Mother included) probably have committed offences against child protection laws and should be investigated. The Radio Station and presenters should be investigated by the Broadcasting Authority.

By: Stilgherrian

Stilgherrian — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:18:45 +0000

Trolling much?