Australian Dj's

[Bazile]

Is this an appropriate / proportianate action by the Broadcaster ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21228017

Or do you think further action should have been taken by them against the two DJ's concerned

[douglas9401]

Yes and no.

[boxtops]

I would have sacked them, but it sounds as if there is still scope for that to happen.

[emmie]

i don't think the DJ's were innocents in all this, but their show was given the green light, so the station should take the brickbats.

[Zeuhl]

True about the station em

they won't want the djs to take any heat because it immediately implicates them.

Anyway, precisely which serious offence did they commit?

They breached the rules on getting permission to broadcast

But legally, they have rightly argued that they had no way of reasonably expecting their silly prank to cause damage or harm to anyone

[jno]

what happened was a worst-case scenario, but that's sort of the point: you play silly buggers on air and don't know what will happen, you take the credit if something goes well but you have to take responsibility when it goes wrong. I think this is fair enough. They haven't been sacked but maybe the station will be more wary of prank calls in future.

[cathfromsaron]

ditto

and maybe hospitals should tell staff that The Queen doesn't phone people ...

[Zeuhl]

jno - indeed so

and

/2Day FM also pledged to give at least 500,000 Australian dollars (£330,600) from its advertising profits to the family of Mrs Saldanha./

[Zeuhl]

yes cath

and provide staff with a proper protocol for handling a caller who says they are...

[Old_Geezer]

I think it hypocritical for radio stations (or TV) to encourage hoax calls for entertainment and then blame the hosts when one goes seriously wrong. All hoax calls have that potential but no one anticipates it. As such I think the treatment of the hosts is fair enough, they already have to live with knowledge of the consequences of their stunt. The real question is what action the stations and their controllers going to apply to themselves.

[Old_Geezer]

Ah: I see that has been the dominant opinion so far then.

[andy-hughes]

I think the action of withdrawing the show is appropriate.

Prank call shows are nasty, snide, humiliating, and deeply unpleasant, especially when anyone who objects is uniformly accused of having no sense of humour.

The two DJ's could not have reasonably forseen such a tragedy - it was and remains a juxtapostion of circumstances that no-one could have anticipated, and as such, they should not shoulder any legal responsibility - i am sure they already carry more than enough moral responsibility.

The station is drawing a line and ,oving on, which is appropriate in my view.

[ludwig]

I'd agree with most of the comments. Something else worth mentioning is that although no-one could have foreseen these partcular consequences, everyone involved should have have the common sense to realise that a hospital is never an appropriate target for this kind of thing.

[emmie]

according to one report, the station has form for this type of prank?

[ludwig]

The prank call is pretty much a standard way for crappy radio shows to fill ten minutes airtime these days em.

Someone phones up some poor sap that's minding their own business and just trying to do their job and attempts to make a fool of them on the air, by putting on a stupid voice and saying something like 'Hello my name is Hugh Jorgan. I'd like to buy some brown corduroy trousers'

It's absolutely hilarious, if you're an emotionally retarded twelve year old. To the rest of us it's a bit tedious.