Film & TV

Apr 29, 2011

The Fairfax data trail that shows Schembri only ‘punk’d’ himself

Troubling new evidence has emerged in the scandal surrounding Age film critic Jim Schembri's infamous Scream 4 spoiler, with secret Fairfax files contradicting the scribe's official explanation for the snafu.

Andrew Crook — Former <em>Crikey</em> Senior Journalist

Andrew Crook

Former Crikey Senior Journalist

Troubling new evidence has emerged in the scandal surrounding Fairfax film critic Jim Schembri’s infamous Scream 4 spoiler, with secret internal documents contradicting the scribe’s official explanation for the snafu.

In a prominent piece written by Schembri for last Friday’s Age Insight section titled “How I punk’d the Twitterverse“, the buff claimed he’d penned two versions of his review to execute a deliberate ruse — one without a spoiler for the print edition of The Age‘s EG filed on Wednesday, April 13 and another version — revealing the killer — that would appear on the web and cause a commotion before being replaced.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

16 thoughts on “The Fairfax data trail that shows Schembri only ‘punk’d’ himself

  1. Tom

    Look –

    a) We all know Jim Schembri is a bit of a tosser; so

    b) most of us just take his antics with a pinch of salt; and anyway

    c) it was Scream 4, fer crissakes, not the equivalent of The Empire Strikes Back; so therefore

    d) why are you still covering this, Crikey?

    Could. Not. Give. Two. Shits.

  2. horse_71

    Totally agree with Tom’s appraisal. The only people interested in this “story” are the protagonists and I can’t understand why Crikey is giving this oxygen……

  3. Ben

    Thanks for the update.

    I guess crikey are still covering this because it helps prove Jim Schembri’s excuse was a lie. And that he should have just said “whoops. my bad” and people would have let it go.

    its in the media section of the crikey website. and no one is making you read it.

  4. SBH

    Sorry? Who cares again?

  5. Rafiq Copeland

    I was at a pub once when a man at the table next to me stood up and said “Christ, I’ve really got to take a Schembri.”

  6. Meski

    I would guess the reason it’s still getting coverage is not the movie’s quality, nor the giveaway of its ending (Yawn) but the dubious ethics of the Fairfax journalist. Yeah, you’re right. Why is it still getting coverage?

  7. Rich Uncle Skeleton

    I want to know why The Age even published Schembri’s excuse in the first place when they knew it was wrong.

  8. Matt Smith

    Honesty in the news is important, guys. Even reviews. For The Age to run a blatant lie like this matters, even if it is just for Scream 4.

    If they admitted that they’d made a mistake in the first place, this would have all gone away now. Instead they pretty much seem to be trying to build a time machine in the back shed.

  9. Stevo the Working Twistie

    Congratulations for managing to find a filler with even less relevance than The Wedding.

  10. Neil Walker

    It’s not about the movie. In a way, this has moved beyond Jim Schembri.

    If Fairfax think it’s now acceptable to allow lies to be published in The Age and not acknowledge it then it’s their loss. The loss of their reputation with readers.

    Editor Paul Ramadge needs to man up and offer an explanation for this fiasco.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details