Maybe people don't post anymore because some on here resort to personal insults, calling others idiots when they disagree with themselves, or demand answers to questions whilst refusing to answer questions put to them.
Your posts say more about you than they do about me, wether you like it or not.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
hoax radio station call
Quote by northwest-cpl
The woman's dead and her death provides another excuse for pointless point scoring. Do you feckers behave like this in the pub of an evening?
I'm not point scoring. I have been accused of treating the dead nurse with contempt. I have done no such thing, unfortunately the other person either can not or will not admit they are wrong. I'm therefore making my position quite clear and I make no excuse for that.
Quote by MidsCouple24
Maybe people don't post anymore because some on here resort to personal insults, calling others idiots when they disagree with themselves, or demand answers to questions whilst refusing to answer questions put to them.
Your posts say more about you than they do about me, wether you like it or not.
OK, I will spell it out for you as you are clearly not capable of comprehending what others write. You made a statement that the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue. I simply asked for clarification upon the 'important issue' ...did you mean the hoax call? How you can interpret that as contempt is beyond me.
As I have said before, you have no idea as to whether the hospital had procedures in place or not and as to whether staff had been briefed. I rather suspect that the hospital does have procedures and that the staff would have been briefed. The nurse that actually gave the information didn't just give the information to '"any old caller" as the call was obviously put through to her with the information that it was the Queen on the lline. What was she supposed to do? Refuse to give the "queen" the information she requested or maybe ask a security question along the lines of " can I have your mother's maiden name please".
Everything is easy with hindsight. It would have been a bloody good risk analysis that highlighted the potential problem of a couple if idiot DJs with Aussie accents masquerading as the Queen and making a hoax call to the hospital.
If you really think logically about this, do you not think the Queen would have direct access to Kate and William and would not have to resort to ringing a hospital reception at am. The hoax call itself was not malicious, as others have pointed out it is something that has been done on numerous other occasions by other 'entertainers'. Unfortunately it had unforeseen and tragic consequences. I'm sure that all concerned would turn back the clock if they could.
Now do you understand my position?
Sex God
I think that this should be looked at from several different angles.
The call itself:
It was in bad taste to attempt to get medical details about a young woman in hospital and broadcast them live on the air. The information was already widely available anyway, so what did this bad taste stunt achieve?
The procedures and protocols of the hospital:
As far as I am aware no one bickering on this site has any in depth knowledge about what the hospital staff are required to do by the hospitals board, am I right? for all we know the number dialled may have been a direct dial number only to be used by that particular patients family.
The deceased:
A woman has died. She was a daughter, a wife and a mother. The speculation that she had mental health issues, that she was on the edge already or that referring a phone call caused her demise entirely is disrespectful from people that no nothing of her life.
As for Max, well far be it from me to put words in his mouth but as far as I see it the 'important issue' being referred to at the time was nothing to do with the person involved, it has just been construed that way, and certainly shows no contempt.
Absolutely right, the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call? As GNV has already said, it is highly unlikely that the Queen would have rung the hospital herself, let alone ring it at am.
All hoax calls are important, hoax calls, cause deaths in the UK every year, hoax calls to the emergency services for example, hoax calls with bomb threats cause widespread disruption to people and businesses let alone cost a fortune, in this case your saying the hoax call is not important because it only led to the death of a nurse ....... I bet she had more sympathy for her patients than you had for her. I hope no nurse ever treats you with the contempt you have for them.
The call itself:
It was in bad taste to attempt to get medical details about a young woman in hospital and broadcast them live on the air. The information was already widely available anyway, so what did this bad taste stunt achieve?
The procedures and protocols of the hospital:
As far as I am aware no one bickering on this site has any in depth knowledge about what the hospital staff are required to do by the hospitals board, am I right? for all we know the number dialled may have been a direct dial number only to be used by that particular patients family.
The deceased:
A woman has died. She was a daughter, a wife and a mother. The speculation that she had mental health issues, that she was on the edge already or that referring a phone call caused her demise entirely is disrespectful from people that no nothing of her life.
As for Max, well far be it from me to put words in his mouth but as far as I see it the 'important issue' being referred to at the time was nothing to do with the person involved, it has just been construed that way, and certainly shows no contempt.
Quote by MidsCouple24
I would guess its all about briefing (or lack of it). Very very unlikely that the Queen would ring up at that time of night for an update. More likely that the Queens physician would ring the Palace.
Absolutely right, the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call? As GNV has already said, it is highly unlikely that the Queen would have rung the hospital herself, let alone ring it at am.
All hoax calls are important, hoax calls, cause deaths in the UK every year, hoax calls to the emergency services for example, hoax calls with bomb threats cause widespread disruption to people and businesses let alone cost a fortune, in this case your saying the hoax call is not important because it only led to the death of a nurse ....... I bet she had more sympathy for her patients than you had for her. I hope no nurse ever treats you with the contempt you have for them.
Quote by Trevaunance
As for Max, well far be it from me to put words in his mouth but as far as I see it the 'important issue' being referred to at the time was nothing to do with the person involved, it has just been construed that way, and certainly shows no contempt.
Thanks Trevaunance. Quite unbelievable how others choose to interpret it differently.
Quote by Trevaunance
I think that this should be looked at from several different angles.
The call itself:
It was in bad taste to attempt to get medical details about a young woman in hospital and broadcast them live on the air. The information was already widely available anyway, so what did this bad taste stunt achieve?
With hindsight we know what the result of the "prank" was, more peoples lives scarred by irresponsible broadcasting by people with no thought or care for the consequences as with the recent case in the UK involving two very well known radio/tv presenters.
The procedures and protocols of the hospital:
As far as I am aware no one bickering on this site has any in depth knowledge about what the hospital staff are required to do by the hospitals board, am I right? for all we know the number dialled may have been a direct dial number only to be used by that particular patients family.
Not quite right, we all know that under the rules of patient confidentiality and medical ethics Hospital staff, surgery staff, visiting midwifes etc do not disclose medical information about patients, unlike the Catholic church they do make exceptions to this rule after carefull consideration. I would imagine that most of the people here have at some time rang a hospital to enquire after someone's condition and found the ethics code to be well practised.
Perhaps it was a direct line, so the question switches to "how was the telephone number only to be used by that patients family obtained by someone in austrailia ? where was the hospital security for that ? I would agree that it is too early to speculate about where the mistakes were made and who is at fault but if nodbody starts asking these questions, they are never answered.
The deceased:
A woman has died. She was a daughter, a wife and a mother. The speculation that she had mental health issues, that she was on the edge already or that referring a phone call caused her demise entirely is disrespectful from people that no nothing of her life.
Totally agree and said as much earlier in the thread.
As for Max, well far be it from me to put words in his mouth but as far as I see it the 'important issue' being referred to at the time was nothing to do with the person involved, it has just been construed that way, and certainly shows no contempt.
Still don't get this, the whole situation arose from a hoax call, how can that call not be relevant or important, if I misunderstood what he meant by his statement (or read what I want to read) I have already said I would apologise but my repeated attempts to ascertain what he meant by the statement remain unanswered, so I say again, to say or imply that a hoax call that results in the death of a person is unimportant is disrespectfull, would anyone hear having found that a loved one had died as a result of an ambulance or fire appliance being late due to a hoax call believe that the hoax call was not important ?
I would guess its all about briefing (or lack of it). Very very unlikely that the Queen would ring up at that time of night for an update. More likely that the Queens physician would ring the Palace.
Absolutely right, the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call? As GNV has already said, it is highly unlikely that the Queen would have rung the hospital herself, let alone ring it at am.
All hoax calls are important, hoax calls, cause deaths in the UK every year, hoax calls to the emergency services for example, hoax calls with bomb threats cause widespread disruption to people and businesses let alone cost a fortune, in this case your saying the hoax call is not important because it only led to the death of a nurse ....... I bet she had more sympathy for her patients than you had for her. I hope no nurse ever treats you with the contempt you have for them.
Quote by MidsCouple24
As for Max, well far be it from me to put words in his mouth but as far as I see it the 'important issue' being referred to at the time was nothing to do with the person involved, it has just been construed that way, and certainly shows no contempt.
Still don't get this, the whole situation arose from a hoax call, how can that call not be relevant or important, if I misunderstood what he meant by his statement (or read what I want to read) I have already said I would apologise but my repeated attempts to ascertain what he meant by the statement remain unanswered, so I say again, to say or imply that a hoax call that results in the death of a person is unimportant is disrespectfull, would anyone hear having found that a loved one had died as a result of an ambulance or fire appliance being late due to a hoax call believe that the hoax call was not important ?
Seeing as how I gave you the explantion you requested some 43 minutes before you made this post I can only assume that I was correct all along and you simply read what you want to read, irrespective of what people actually write and will do anything but admit that you were wrong.
Quote by flower411
Just as an aside .......
Has anybody actually seen a credible source that states that the suicide was a direct result of the hoax call?
Does anybody know for certain that the hospital didn`t have procedures in place ?
Does anybody know anything at all other than the fact there was a hoax call and a suicide ?
I'm in total agreement with you Flower. It must be nearly Xmas
Quote by Max777
Just as an aside .......
Has anybody actually seen a credible source that states that the suicide was a direct result of the hoax call?
Does anybody know for certain that the hospital didn`t have procedures in place ?
Does anybody know anything at all other than the fact there was a hoax call and a suicide ?
I'm in total agreement with you Flower. It must be nearly Xmas
Me too !
Sex God
Quote by MidsCouple24
The call itself:
It was in bad taste to attempt to get medical details about a young woman in hospital and broadcast them live on the air. The information was already widely available anyway, so what did this bad taste stunt achieve?
With hindsight we know what the result of the "prank" was, more peoples lives scarred by irresponsible broadcasting by people with no thought or care for the consequences
With hindsight you are speculating erroneously what the result of the prank was. At the time that the phone was hung up what had been achieved? Some people had passed themselves of as the Queen and Prince Charles and obtained publicly available information. They didn't find out anything that you or I could have found out from TV, papers, radio or internet sources.
Quote by MidsCouple24
The procedures and protocols of the hospital:
As far as I am aware no one bickering on this site has any in depth knowledge about what the hospital staff are required to do by the hospitals board, am I right? for all we know the number dialled may have been a direct dial number only to be used by that particular patients family.
Not quite right, we all know that under the rules of patient confidentiality and medical ethics Hospital staff, surgery staff, visiting midwifes etc do not disclose medical information about patients, unlike the Catholic church they do make exceptions to this rule after carefull consideration. I would imagine that most of the people here have at some time rang a hospital to enquire after someone's condition and found the ethics code to be well practised.
I agree, but as I have no idea whether the procedures for the hospital were followed it is not my place to damn them. What I do know is that the hospitals security measures were already under review before the tragic news broke regarding the nurse. Having listened to the broadcast I can say that their was either no procedure in place, it was somehow circumvented, or perhaps it wasn't followed.
Quote by MidsCouple24
Perhaps it was a direct line, so the question switches to "how was the telephone number only to be used by that patients family obtained by someone in austrailia ? where was the hospital security for that ? I would agree that it is too early to speculate about where the mistakes were made and who is at fault but if nodbody starts asking these questions, they are never answered.
I would suggest that those questions are better asked and answered by people connected to the Royal family and the hospital? I honestly don't think that you or I are likely to be asked what we think.
Quote by MidsCouple24
As for Max, well far be it from me to put words in his mouth but as far as I see it the 'important issue' being referred to at the time was nothing to do with the person involved, it has just been construed that way, and certainly shows no contempt.
Still don't get this, the whole situation arose from a hoax call, how can that call not be relevant or important
The 'situation' as you call it is an apparent though not confirmed, suicide. Speculating that it is connected with the phone call is a logical, but not proven step. As I read Max's comments it appears clear that he was solely referring to the phone call, not the unfortunate fate of the nurse. He certainly didn't appear to show any contempt to anyone in my view. How could he when he hasn't mentioned anyone?
Read again below:
Quote by MidsCouple24
I would guess its all about briefing (or lack of it). Very very unlikely that the Queen would ring up at that time of night for an update. More likely that the Queens physician would ring the Palace.
Absolutely right, the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call? As GNV has already said, it is highly unlikely that the Queen would have rung the hospital herself, let alone ring it at am.
All hoax calls are important, hoax calls, cause deaths in the UK every year, hoax calls to the emergency services for example, hoax calls with bomb threats cause widespread disruption to people and businesses let alone cost a fortune, in this case your saying the hoax call is not important because it only led to the death of a nurse ....... I bet she had more sympathy for her patients than you had for her. I hope no nurse ever treats you with the contempt you have for them.
Quote by MidsCouple24
if I misunderstood what he meant by his statement (or read what I want to read) I have already said I would apologise.
Fair comment, and we all know you do.
Quote by MidsCouple24
but my repeated attempts to ascertain what he meant by the statement remain unanswered,
On the contrary, it has been answered. Perhaps you could now answer the question that max has repeatedly asked? Where did he show contempt for the deceased?
Sex God
Quote by Paddy
Just as an aside .......
Has anybody actually seen a credible source that states that the suicide was a direct result of the hoax call?
Does anybody know for certain that the hospital didn`t have procedures in place ?
Does anybody know anything at all other than the fact there was a hoax call and a suicide ?
I'm in total agreement with you Flower. It must be nearly Xmas
Me too !
Ditto.
Well, the Australians seem to be taking it seriously enough.
If there needs to be a reality check here.... There was perhaps nothing wrong with attempting the scam - it makes 'good' broadcasting. Where this went spectacularly wrong is in what followed.
Having 'breached' the hospital's defences with their false accents and got through to the nurse who disclosed information inappropriately, there was no need for the radio station to then break all confidentiality rules and transmit what they recorded without first considering the consequences of doing so.
Someone mentioned Jeremy Beadle, Jonothan Routh et al. Of course it was great television and very funny to see people 'hoodwinked' but the significant difference here was that none of those transmissions were made WITHOUT the consent of the 'target'.
Who is to say that it may have been entirely different had the radio station 'fessed up' and sought permission from the two nurses and/or their employer before broadcasting. There would have been no need to broadcast the personal details they obtained unexpectedly but the funny side of the dreadful accents could still have been broadcast for amusement and I doubt that very many would have condemned them for doing so.
Whatever one does in life, there may be consequences. The radio station had been warned, allegedly, twice before about these sort of antics and this time their actions had terrible consequences. The DJs probably did not act alone. The transmission was probably sanctioned by the station management. Even before the announcement of the nurses' death, the nursing union in Australia had rung the station to complain about it. The DJs acted immaturely and they should have been protected from themselves by their management team.
The hospital management should not be the ones beng condemned. The radio station is the author of its own misfortune and condemnation lies very clearly at their door IMHO and they are quite rightly now suffering the consequences. They owed a duty of care to their employees and they failed them.
If there needs to be a reality check here.... There was perhaps nothing wrong with attempting the scam - it makes 'good' broadcasting. Where this went spectacularly wrong is in what followed.
Having 'breached' the hospital's defences with their false accents and got through to the nurse who disclosed information inappropriately, there was no need for the radio station to then break all confidentiality rules and transmit what they recorded without first considering the consequences of doing so.
Someone mentioned Jeremy Beadle, Jonothan Routh et al. Of course it was great television and very funny to see people 'hoodwinked' but the significant difference here was that none of those transmissions were made WITHOUT the consent of the 'target'.
Who is to say that it may have been entirely different had the radio station 'fessed up' and sought permission from the two nurses and/or their employer before broadcasting. There would have been no need to broadcast the personal details they obtained unexpectedly but the funny side of the dreadful accents could still have been broadcast for amusement and I doubt that very many would have condemned them for doing so.
Whatever one does in life, there may be consequences. The radio station had been warned, allegedly, twice before about these sort of antics and this time their actions had terrible consequences. The DJs probably did not act alone. The transmission was probably sanctioned by the station management. Even before the announcement of the nurses' death, the nursing union in Australia had rung the station to complain about it. The DJs acted immaturely and they should have been protected from themselves by their management team.
The hospital management should not be the ones beng condemned. The radio station is the author of its own misfortune and condemnation lies very clearly at their door IMHO and they are quite rightly now suffering the consequences. They owed a duty of care to their employees and they failed them.
Sexpert
I really think the media want to have a long hard think about the Ethics of what they are doing. Albeit this story is an extreme example.
Generally when people phone a hospital they are calling about the health of a relative. I would hope that if any of my relatives were in Hospital I could call, identify myself as husband, father, son etc, and get to speak to somebody accordingly. The hospital should be able to believe 'my word' over the phone.
If journalists, DJs etc regularly start to use this as a route for getting information about the more newsworthy patients in a hospital, how is this going to work? To my mind these sort of phone calls should just be considered totally unacceptable behavior.
What ever the mental health issues of the nurse involved this has all gone way to far as joke. My sympathies go entirely to the family of the Jacintha Saldanha. It's not too often that I think this but the two 'DJs' can rot in hell as far as I'm concerned.
Generally when people phone a hospital they are calling about the health of a relative. I would hope that if any of my relatives were in Hospital I could call, identify myself as husband, father, son etc, and get to speak to somebody accordingly. The hospital should be able to believe 'my word' over the phone.
If journalists, DJs etc regularly start to use this as a route for getting information about the more newsworthy patients in a hospital, how is this going to work? To my mind these sort of phone calls should just be considered totally unacceptable behavior.
What ever the mental health issues of the nurse involved this has all gone way to far as joke. My sympathies go entirely to the family of the Jacintha Saldanha. It's not too often that I think this but the two 'DJs' can rot in hell as far as I'm concerned.
Quote by Trevaunance
but my repeated attempts to ascertain what he meant by the statement remain unanswered,
On the contrary, it has been answered. Perhaps you could now answer the question that max has repeatedly asked? Where did he show contempt for the deceased?
The silence is deafening, Trevaunance!
Quote by Max777
but my repeated attempts to ascertain what he meant by the statement remain unanswered,
On the contrary, it has been answered. Perhaps you could now answer the question that max has repeatedly asked? Where did he show contempt for the deceased?
The silence is deafening, Trevaunance!
He's probably still recovering from a night of quality fucking.
Shasha can be quite demanding from what I can see :rascal:
MidsCouple24 wrote:
GnV wrote:
I would guess its all about briefing (or lack of it). Very very unlikely that the Queen would ring up at that time of night for an update. More likely that the Queens physician would ring the Palace.
Absolutely right, the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue, how would anyone here feel if information of a personal nature was given to "any old caller" when they were in hospital let alone someone as important to the nation as the Duchess.
Anyway, what's done is done.
Yea she is dead what does that matter, let's just forget it and move on
Two red faced Aussie DJ's now laughing on the other side of their faces.... And probably swimming in their own faeces.
One might hope two ex DJ's
MAX wrote (in answer to the above which he quoted)
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call? As GNV has already said, it is highly unlikely that the Queen would have rung the hospital herself, let alone ring it at am.
It is plain to see in the paragraph copied and pasted from the first page of the thread that the "important issue" is that which GnV wrote about, ie the phone call, which has been shown to be a hoax call.
Max then asked (shown above)
"what important issue.....a hoax call, why he asked that I do not know since in this post no other important issue was discussed other than the phone call.
To me Max is implying the phone call ie the hoax is not an important issue, despite the fact that it appears to have been the cause (perhaps the final straw amidst others) to have caused the nurse to take her own life.
Therefore I think it fair for me to assume that the nurses death was to him, not an important issue.
Accused of "reading only what I want to read" I think the shoe might be on the other foot and part quoting statements or posts can easily change the context.
The reason I did not want to answer the question was quite simply because the thead is being taken away from the real purpose of it, discussing the incident, the morals and the responsibilities of what happened.
I see it is a rule for one and that one is you write verbal abuse to me in here, call me names say what you want, but god forbid don't say anything to you about not caring eh.
____________________________________________________________________________________
GnV wrote:
I would guess its all about briefing (or lack of it). Very very unlikely that the Queen would ring up at that time of night for an update. More likely that the Queens physician would ring the Palace.
Absolutely right, the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue, how would anyone here feel if information of a personal nature was given to "any old caller" when they were in hospital let alone someone as important to the nation as the Duchess.
Anyway, what's done is done.
Yea she is dead what does that matter, let's just forget it and move on
Two red faced Aussie DJ's now laughing on the other side of their faces.... And probably swimming in their own faeces.
One might hope two ex DJ's
MAX wrote (in answer to the above which he quoted)
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call? As GNV has already said, it is highly unlikely that the Queen would have rung the hospital herself, let alone ring it at am.
It is plain to see in the paragraph copied and pasted from the first page of the thread that the "important issue" is that which GnV wrote about, ie the phone call, which has been shown to be a hoax call.
Max then asked (shown above)
"what important issue.....a hoax call, why he asked that I do not know since in this post no other important issue was discussed other than the phone call.
To me Max is implying the phone call ie the hoax is not an important issue, despite the fact that it appears to have been the cause (perhaps the final straw amidst others) to have caused the nurse to take her own life.
Therefore I think it fair for me to assume that the nurses death was to him, not an important issue.
Accused of "reading only what I want to read" I think the shoe might be on the other foot and part quoting statements or posts can easily change the context.
The reason I did not want to answer the question was quite simply because the thead is being taken away from the real purpose of it, discussing the incident, the morals and the responsibilities of what happened.
I see it is a rule for one and that one is you write verbal abuse to me in here, call me names say what you want, but god forbid don't say anything to you about not caring eh.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Quote by MidsCouple24
MidsCouple24 wrote:
GnV wrote:
I would guess its all about briefing (or lack of it). Very very unlikely that the Queen would ring up at that time of night for an update. More likely that the Queens physician would ring the Palace.
Absolutely right, the hospital failed to brief staff or have personnel in place to deal with such an important issue, how would anyone here feel if information of a personal nature was given to "any old caller" when they were in hospital let alone someone as important to the nation as the Duchess.
Anyway, what's done is done.
Yea she is dead what does that matter, let's just forget it and move on
Two red faced Aussie DJ's now laughing on the other side of their faces.... And probably swimming in their own faeces.
One might hope two ex DJ's
MAX wrote (in answer to the above which he quoted)
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call? As GNV has already said, it is highly unlikely that the Queen would have rung the hospital herself, let alone ring it at am.
It is plain to see in the paragraph copied and pasted from the first page of the thread that the "important issue" is that which GnV wrote about, ie the phone call, which has been shown to be a hoax call.
Max then asked (shown above)
"what important issue.....a hoax call, why he asked that I do not know since in this post no other important issue was discussed other than the phone call.
To me Max is implying the phone call ie the hoax is not an important issue, despite the fact that it appears to have been the cause (perhaps the final straw amidst others) to have caused the nurse to take her own life.
Therefore I think it fair for me to assume that the nurses death was to him, not an important issue.
Accused of "reading only what I want to read" I think the shoe might be on the other foot and part quoting statements or posts can easily change the context.
The reason I did not want to answer the question was quite simply because the thead is being taken aiway from the real purpose of it, discussing the incident, the morals and the responsibilities of what happened.
I see it is a rule for one and that one is you write verbal abuse to me in here, call me names say what you want, but god forbid don't say anything to you about not caring eh.
____________________________________________________________________________________
OK, let's put things into perspective.
You made a totally incorrect and illogical assumption following a post of mine that was so simple it could have been understood by anyone possessing the basic rudiments of English grammar. I asked a simple question, what important issue? You then made a derogatory accusation against me.
I subsequently pointed out your error upon several occasions and requested an apology. You refused to apologise.
It was then that I made my comments regarding your 'idiotic comments, ' as how the hell you can read what you believe I meant from such a simple question is way beyond me. YOU started this by making totally incorrect and derogatory accusations against me which you continue to perpetuate.
I have given you the explanation you wanted and yet you still refuse to acknowledge you are wrong.
I am going to retract my earlier statement that you can't be as stupid as you make out. Clearly you are.
Sex God
Quote by MidsCouple24
To me Max is implying the phone call ie the hoax is not an important issue, despite the fact that it appears to have been the cause (perhaps the final straw amidst others) to have caused the nurse to take her own life.
I hadn't posted in this thread at the time and it certainly didn't read that way to me when I caught up and read all the posts.
Quote by MidsCouple24
Therefore I think it fair for me to assume that the nurses death was to him, not an important issue.
No that is not a fair assumption. Max has clearly said that was not the case several times.
Quote by MidsCouple24
Accused of "reading only what I want to read" I think the shoe might be on the other foot and part quoting statements or posts can easily change the context.
The fact of the matter is simple. you don't seem to understand Punctuation.
Quote by Max777
Deal with what such important issue....a hoax call?
Can you see the question mark? Its large and red to help you see it. Max is clearly asking "what is the 'important issue? Is it the hoax call?"
Quote by MidsCouple24
The reason I did not want to answer the question was quite simply because the thead is being taken away from the real purpose of it, discussing the incident, the morals and the responsibilities of what happened.
Perhaps if you had answered the question then the thread would have stayed more relevant to the topic.
Quote by MidsCouple24
I see it is a rule for one and that one is you write verbal abuse to me in here, call me names say what you want,
Grow up!
Quote by MidsCouple24
but god forbid don't say anything to you about not caring eh.
Say what you like, I don't care. but if your going to accuse people of something make sure you can back it up.
Quote by GnV
Well, the Australians seem to be taking it seriously enough.
If there needs to be a reality check here.... There was perhaps nothing wrong with attempting the scam - it makes 'good' broadcasting. Where this went spectacularly wrong is in what followed.
Having 'breached' the hospital's defences with their false accents and got through to the nurse who disclosed information inappropriately, there was no need for the radio station to then break all confidentiality rules and transmit what they recorded without first considering the consequences of doing so.
Someone mentioned Jeremy Beadle, Jonothan Routh et al. Of course it was great television and very funny to see people 'hoodwinked' but the significant difference here was that none of those transmissions were made WITHOUT the consent of the 'target'.
Who is to say that it may have been entirely different had the radio station 'fessed up' and sought permission from the two nurses and/or their employer before broadcasting. There would have been no need to broadcast the personal details they obtained unexpectedly but the funny side of the dreadful accents could still have been broadcast for amusement and I doubt that very many would have condemned them for doing so.
Whatever one does in life, there may be consequences. The radio station had been warned, allegedly, twice before about these sort of antics and this time their actions had terrible consequences. The DJs probably did not act alone. The transmission was probably sanctioned by the station management. Even before the announcement of the nurses' death, the nursing union in Australia had rung the station to complain about it. The DJs acted immaturely and they should have been protected from themselves by their management team.
The hospital management should not be the ones beng condemned. The radio station is the author of its own misfortune and condemnation lies very clearly at their door IMHO and they are quite rightly now suffering the consequences. They owed a duty of care to their employees and they failed them.
I agree with only one addition I would make personally.
"The hospital management should not be theTHE ONLY ones beng condemned."
The hospital as you rightly say did, for whatever reason, fail in thier duty of care to the confidentiality of thier patients, confidentiality that everyone expects of all members of the medical profession with out medical records, our visits to the Doctors, our time spent in hospital or anywhere, it is rare that errors are made, I think the last reported case I saw was the loss of a laptop containing such information on patients, obviously they do take patient confidentiality very seriously so it is only to be expected that with such high profile targets security would have been even higher.
For god's sake I see every aspect of this as being an important issue, to suggest that any part of it is not is disrespectfull, be it the hoax call itself, the nurses sad death, the radio stations broadcast of the information, the subsequent discussion here and elsewhere, the Police investigation here, the official "radio monitors" in Australia, the rules for confidentiality at the hospital, the DJ#s involved, the Royal Family themselves, thier advisors and security personnel anything and anyone involved in the issue.
Sex God
Random rants help no one.
Quote by flower
My personal opinion of the DJ`s is that they are lowlife scumbags ....
I think they are just as much victims in this as others are.
The real villains of the piece are, as you alluded to, the radio station.
I actually feel sorry for the DJs. I'm sure they are decent people with a sense of fun and their lives are now ruined too. They are young and perhaps not so impetuous as their employers and critics are leading us to believe.
We all make inappropriate decisions to do things in our lives. Thank goodness sometimes there are people behind us to pull us back down to reality.
Having now just watched the full interview with the DJs, I fully believe that there was no malice intended and they were let down dreadfully by their masters. It was not their decision to broadcast, but the station's management. They have admitted it was their idea to make the hoax call but all they do afterwards is to pass it back to the office whose responsibility it is to deal with the legalities concerning public interest and content. The management are continuing their arrogance and they deserve to have their licence pulled. They say they tried to contact the hospital before broadcasting to obtain the legally required permission but they were not able to establish contact with anyone.
If that was the case, and I don't actually believe it, they should have held back transmission until contact had been made. I wouldn't at all be surprised that the management hold republican views and are not monarchists. In essence, they hung their two young go ahead vulnerable DJs out to dry. Disgraceful.
I think their main advertiser has already pulled its backing. As for the radio station, I hope their days are numbered.
Now I have only seen tiny little snippets of this from the media, but let me get this right. An Australian radio station gave permission for two DJ's to ring up the King Edward VII's Hospital and pretend they were the Queen and Prince Charles?
Jacintha Saldanha spoke with them and gave away confidential information on the Duchess of Kent's condition. The two DJ's then set about broadcasting the telephone conversation on their show and took great delight in the hoax call. Subsequently Jacintha Saldanha committed suicide for giving away that information?
Have I got this right before I comment further?
Jacintha Saldanha spoke with them and gave away confidential information on the Duchess of Kent's condition. The two DJ's then set about broadcasting the telephone conversation on their show and took great delight in the hoax call. Subsequently Jacintha Saldanha committed suicide for giving away that information?
Have I got this right before I comment further?
Not quite star.
"An Australian radio station gave permission for two DJ's to ring up the King Edward VII's Hospital and pretend they were the Queen and Prince Charles? "
The DJ's rang up on their own initiative.
"Jacintha Saldanha spoke with them and gave away confidential information on the Duchess of Kent's condition."
Jacitha spoke to them briefly, only putting the call through to the ward. A different nurse disclosed confidential information.
"The two DJ's then set about broadcasting the telephone conversation on their show"
The authority to broadcast came from the management team at the radio station. The decision to broadcast was not the DJs to make.
"and took great delight in the hoax call."
At the time, yes. It was intended that the joke would be on them with their awful accents.
"Subsequently Jacintha Saldanha committed suicide for giving away that information? "
At this moment in time, pure conjecture. More information about her tragic death will no doubt emerge from the Coroner's Inquest yet to be held. As indicated, another nurse apparently gave away 'that information'.
"An Australian radio station gave permission for two DJ's to ring up the King Edward VII's Hospital and pretend they were the Queen and Prince Charles? "
The DJ's rang up on their own initiative.
"Jacintha Saldanha spoke with them and gave away confidential information on the Duchess of Kent's condition."
Jacitha spoke to them briefly, only putting the call through to the ward. A different nurse disclosed confidential information.
"The two DJ's then set about broadcasting the telephone conversation on their show"
The authority to broadcast came from the management team at the radio station. The decision to broadcast was not the DJs to make.
"and took great delight in the hoax call."
At the time, yes. It was intended that the joke would be on them with their awful accents.
"Subsequently Jacintha Saldanha committed suicide for giving away that information? "
At this moment in time, pure conjecture. More information about her tragic death will no doubt emerge from the Coroner's Inquest yet to be held. As indicated, another nurse apparently gave away 'that information'.
Well thank you very much for that information GnV.
Well this is indeed a conundrum. I think the nurse in question a Jacintha Saldanha must have had ' issues ' of which I am sure will be released in due time. What other possible feasible logical explanation can there be? Are people seriously saying that she killed herself because she inadvertently put a call through from two Australian DJ's with I would have said very dodgy upper class accents, to the Duchesses ward? What really?
Time will tell with any inquest that may or may not come about because of this, but for me I think the hoax was an absolute typical brilliant bit of ' fun ', for that is what it was meant to be. Come on...... I know there has been a tragic death here for reason which people are ' speculating ' a lot about, but this was a brilliant wind up.
Now though the two DJ's are being hounded as per, for a death that surely they cannot be held accountable for? There are a million pranks every day of the year that we all find funny, but my speculation without any evidence, is that the nurse in question must have had some kind of hidden mental issues, for her to commit suicide over something like this surely?
I shall await the ' official ' findings into this, but the hoax was a brilliant prank and that really is as simple as that. Yes maybe with tragic consequences, but surely most people must be scratching their heads as to why a person would kill themselves over something that most people would have thought was actually a very good laugh at the time.
Do we now start looking at possible consequences over every single prank that happens in the world? If that is the case the makers of cotton wool will be having a field day and I shall better start going and buying some shares in their companies.
Well this is indeed a conundrum. I think the nurse in question a Jacintha Saldanha must have had ' issues ' of which I am sure will be released in due time. What other possible feasible logical explanation can there be? Are people seriously saying that she killed herself because she inadvertently put a call through from two Australian DJ's with I would have said very dodgy upper class accents, to the Duchesses ward? What really?
Time will tell with any inquest that may or may not come about because of this, but for me I think the hoax was an absolute typical brilliant bit of ' fun ', for that is what it was meant to be. Come on...... I know there has been a tragic death here for reason which people are ' speculating ' a lot about, but this was a brilliant wind up.
Now though the two DJ's are being hounded as per, for a death that surely they cannot be held accountable for? There are a million pranks every day of the year that we all find funny, but my speculation without any evidence, is that the nurse in question must have had some kind of hidden mental issues, for her to commit suicide over something like this surely?
I shall await the ' official ' findings into this, but the hoax was a brilliant prank and that really is as simple as that. Yes maybe with tragic consequences, but surely most people must be scratching their heads as to why a person would kill themselves over something that most people would have thought was actually a very good laugh at the time.
Do we now start looking at possible consequences over every single prank that happens in the world? If that is the case the makers of cotton wool will be having a field day and I shall better start going and buying some shares in their companies.
