Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

To feel sorry for the Australian DJs?

921 replies

andapartridgeinaRowantree · 08/12/2012 00:38

Obviously more sorry for the nurse's family. I wonder how long she was having suicidal thoughts for? I can't think this could have been the only cause,

But these pranks have been going on for such a long time and those DJs could not have predicted such a result and are going to have to live with it for the rest of their lives.

It's such a tragedy and I feel very sad for all concerned.

OP posts:
farandawaysheran · 09/12/2012 22:07

You could also argue that we all, with direct experience of famy grief, cope in our own ways.

My point, which I've been making with arse aching monotony for most of the day, is that none of us know how other people are really feeling inside and what despair lurks under the surface.

So we could all learn to be a bit kinder and more generous of spirit tp the strangers we interact with here daily.

Would that be a more fitting legacy that baying for revenge?

It's been a fascinating discussion. peaceful goodnight to all.

babytrasher · 09/12/2012 22:07

Even if they did not expect to succeed, they set out intending to get a medical professional to reveal confidential info: this is a gross misconduct offence, instantly sackable w/o compensation.

They are equivalent, morally and (I think) legally, to joy-riders who kill a pedestrian: they set out to kool themselves up in the eyes of their primarily teen audience, but got it wrong. They did not intend that anyone should die, but it was a possible consequence of their action and they must accept responsibility for it.

I hope that the "intensive counseling" that they are alleged to be receiving consists of an Outback-style directive to "deal with it", rather than a Sidney-style "It's not your fault". Angry Angry Angry Angry Angry

EverlongLovesHerChristmasRobin · 09/12/2012 22:08

Oh Confused Nigel I just presumed....as I haven't agreed with shelly

giveitago · 09/12/2012 22:09

"Let me throw this back..would you leave your children over this 'shame'? I wouldn't. "

No , you wouldn't. But now you're saying she suffered 'shame'. You know that for a fact? You are again insulting her character.

That hole gets bigger - you might not think before you post but you are responsible for what you post. You might think one thing but if people don't agree with you then they don't. I don't get the culture of hatred so I don't get you.

I agree ohdear re the hospital handling of this ie having a coordinator to deal with press and any other interest, even that of relatives.

Shelly32 · 09/12/2012 22:16

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

LondonNinja · 09/12/2012 22:20

Shelly, ideally no one should have their intellect called into question in a debate but I think you have caused hurt by some of the things you said about suicide. That is fact. (I am not picking a fight with you btw.)

Speaking generally in relation to poor Jacintha, I just cannot abide some people's casualness with what others go through in life. No one has the right to assume a person will feel this or do that just because it's what they'd feel/do.

Welovecouscous · 09/12/2012 22:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

flippinada · 09/12/2012 22:26

I agree LondonNinja

I wish people speculating on what Ms Saldanha's frame of mind was and how she must have had mental health issues etc would pack it in. It's really disrespectful and inappropriate.

Shelly32 · 09/12/2012 22:28

Londonninja I know you're not! I don't think I've said anything intentionally insulting about suicide. Apologies to anyone if I have. I think I just said I didn't understand what would cause a mother to do this over something that I (personally) see as pretty trivial. I wasn't meaning to be casual or insensitive. Clearly it's been taken in that manner but that's the risk you take when you can't see people face to face, hear tone of voice or see facial expression/body language.

peaceandlovebunny · 09/12/2012 23:04

you could be absolutely rock solid mentally previously, and be brought to the point of suicide by global humiliation. stop blaming the victim.

giveitago · 09/12/2012 23:06

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

wannaBe · 09/12/2012 23:14

I am Shock at the double standards and hypocrisy expressed on this thread.

So, a woman receives a hoax call, puts it through to a relevant department and because of the stress caused to her by the backlash commits suicide over it. And that is tragic - of course it is, and posters express their upset and anger and whatever other emotions they feel over it, and anyone who dares go against that is jumped on.

Two DJ's make a prank call to a London hospital. A call which was of course ill advised, but which ended up in a woman killing herself - an outcome which nobody could possibly have foreseen. They are reportedly distraught over it, one of them is believed to be on the verge of a breakdown, and they are receiving counselling. But we must not feel sympathy for them because they don't deserve it. Even though they made a mistake and did something they shouldn't have. A stupid act yes, but had they known what the outcome would be there is surely no doubt that that call wouldn't have been made.

Imagine if you did something stupid and someone died as a result. Would you feell you were undeserving of sympathy, even if your actions weren't deliberate? really?

That nurse made a mistake in the public eye. The two dj's did something stupid and are being publically ridiculed for it. The only diffference here is that one person killed herself over her mistake, the others did not. If you have compassion for her, then surely it follows that you should have compassion for them. The outcome of this was entirely unforeseeable.

EverlongLovesHerChristmasRobin · 09/12/2012 23:23

Not comparable. Sorry.

The dj's didn't make a mistake.

There was always somebody going to get hurt/in trouble/lose their job if their prank worked.

andapartridgeinaRowantree · 09/12/2012 23:38

Wannabe thank you. That's exactly the poiny I was making when I set up the thread.

I feel sorry for all parties.

OP posts:
giveitago · 09/12/2012 23:51

Jacintha didn't make a mistake in that she genuinely thought the callers were from family and put it through. She was a victim of a prank.

cornflowers · 09/12/2012 23:51

Wannabe I agree entirely. A little compassion would not go astray.

RedToothbrush · 09/12/2012 23:54

wannbe the outcomes that WERE foreseeable and highly likely aren't paltable in my book, and I do see clear parallels between this and health and safety incidents involving corporate or publicly owned bodies on physical health - except this is a mental health issue.

Thats the problem for me. And in those cases I do believe that people have to be held responsible at the radio station from the top down unfortunately.

The highly questionable decisions aren't not just a simple decision but a catalogue of them in succession with a total lack of regard for anyone else's well being.

And I do think you have to immediately put it in terms of well being, because this was targeted on a sick young woman.

So 1) You are targeting someone sick and vulnerable. Its not difficult to understand that it was entirely possible that the Duchess's condition could have been fair worse than publicly announced
2) You get through and get told information that you shouldn't and still allow it to be broadcast; and if you are the DJ and this goes over your head fine - but certainly the male DJ was laughing about it and making crass remarks about it being very good
3) You don't seek consent of those involved. Mainly because you know full well this was going to be refused as it would cause upset.
4) You get the lawyers in to check you haven't broken the law. Thus unwittingly acknowledging this could be quite a bit deal and theres a real possibility that you've already broken the law or could get your arse sued over this. But you decide to take the risk knowing the potential reward. And then even after the tragic death the radio station keeps pushing the point that they hadn't done anything illegal instead of ultimately manning up and taking responsibility.
5) And thats all before taking into the consideration the consequences to third parties who could easily loose their jobs over such an incident - got nothing to do with mental health but every bit as serious and not a laughing matter for anyone caught in the cross fire.
6) You do things that the British Press have a self imposed code of conduct not to do.
7) This particular radio station had previous on poor ethics, and they should have taken action previously to educate staff and prevent incidents like this from happening again. And if more junior members of staff were failed in this duty, they still should have been aware of the incident and been more conscious of ethical issues themselves to protect themselves.
8) This was organised and premeditated. Unlike the nurse put on the spot and deliberately lied to and misled.

You can not put a parallel between what happened to the nurse and what the DJs took a leading and active role in.

I could go on about the sheer number of things and points where alarm bells could and should have gone off and were ignored because profit and self promotion were the priority rather than anything else.

If a corporate body don't maintain their machinery properly and this poses a potential physical risk to the life or health of the general public even if this is highly unlikely event and the most extreme outcomes are beyond what people thought was possible, and there was no intent to harm anyone, the company and those individuals responsible within the company can still be held responsible. The question that is asked in these cases is, what are you reasonably able to predict and did you do everything within your power to minimise the risk of physical harm to others.

The fact this happens to be mental rather than physical harm seems to give people a completely different attitude to responsibility. And the fact that its resulted in a suicide means that people take the attitude that it was beyond the limits of prediction. But that misses the point of just how much damage WAS predictable and the radio station seemingly judged as acceptable.

And its in THIS context, that I have an extremely hard time giving sympathy to those responsible. Because it wasn't a simple stupid mistake. It was not a 'prank'. It was a massive public stunt that all concerned staked their reputation and image on. It was deeply calculated and carried on over the course of events. It was a corporate level mistake with many people responsible within the radio station. Its not just the DJs - and I personally feel those behind them are hiding behind them in many respects.

flow4 · 10/12/2012 00:32

I agree with wannabe.

I am curious to know what people would think if one of the DJs was now so filled with guilt that s/he committed suicide (heaven forfend)...?

Narked · 10/12/2012 03:11

'an outcome which nobody could possibly have foreseen'

Maybe not, but there are many things that could have been forseen.

Phoning a hospital to con staff into giving out patient information is going to have consequences. It might well cause someone to lose their job, be suspended, officially reprimanded etc etc. That's a fairly likely consequence isn't it?

Recording someone being 'pranked' when you have no idea who you're talking to is a risk isn't it? If you do it often enough, you're going to do it to someone who's having a tough time in their personal life, someone with a history of depression etc etc. I'm not saying this poor woman had any issues, simply that in any given population you will find a good % of people do have these kind of issues. If you make 10 calls the odds are you'll get at least one person who is vunerable. That's forseeable.

If you humiliate someone on a global scale it's likely to cause them great personal distress. That was forseeable.

The DJs themselves were stupid and callous but the radio station is the one that pays them - and others - to do this kind of thing to get the ratings. It makes money from it. It was already effectively on probation from Australian regulators. The station is the one that decided it was ok to 'prank' a hospital. The station approved the tape. The station is making a big deal about how no laws have been broken, as though that is what matters.

And it's odd how the station is suddenly aware of the emotional toll intense media attention can have Shock , accusing the UK media of stirring up a frenzy and commenting on the distress of the presenters.

seeker · 10/12/2012 03:23

"Jacintha didn't make a mistake in that she genuinely thought the callers were from family and put it through. She was a victim of a prank"
She did make a mistake. She put a call through which if she had had a hint of training on how to deal with calls about a high profile patient she would have dealt with very differently. Or actually how to deal with calls about patients full stop- high profile or not.'

wannaBe · 10/12/2012 03:32

yes she made a mistake. She shouldn't have put that call through. the woman (who had the most god awful accent you could possibly imagine) said "oh can I speak to my granddaughter, Kate?" Let's not even start on the other one who gave out information while someone was blathering on in the background and while others were woofing badly like dogs....

The call shouldn't have been made but it was blatantly obvious that it was a hoax. The fact that not one, but two members of staff fell for it was down to them and them alone. It wasn't even remotely plausible, in fact the general feeling was that it was entirely made up, until the hospital issued an apology. The fact that the hospital did not have protocols in place to deal with incoming calls to that hospital at any given hour was down to poor management. This wasn't a well thought out scam designed to suck people in, it was a blundering phone call which no-one actually believed would come to anything. If two muppets from a radio station could get through that easily, who else would have been able to?

No they shouldn't have called, but they did, and that was their responsibility. But equally they shouldn't have been able to get through, but they did, and the responsibility for that was down to the two members of staff who fell for their act. An act which wasn't plausible in the slightest.

What happens if one of those DJ's kills himself in the face of the worldwide criticism he is now receiving. Criticism which is much harsher than that
directed at the nurse who put through his call.

How in fact do we not know that either of those DJ's is suffering from mental illness? fact is we don't.

AppearingDignified · 10/12/2012 04:12

I'm so angry with the way the Aussie media is now handling it; accusing the UK of the blame game arguing that they did nothing wrong.

Does something have to be enshrined in law to make it wrong/ morally reprehensible?

I loathe prank calls, turn them off or turn over if they are on the radio they are a form of bullying in my opinion. "Ooh, look how gullible and stupid you are to take this call at face value". When i answer the phone I presume, obviously in a stupid and gullible fashion that the caller wishes to talk to me.

Immature wankers and apologising in a sincere fashion would be a great start.

Snowkey · 10/12/2012 06:21

Feel very sorry for the nurse's family. Have suspicions that she got it in the neck from the hospital management who seem to have gone very quiet. The media as usual have reported on the prank call and blown it out of all proportion to sell papers, no wonder the poor woman felt under strain.
The DJs were stupid to do what they did but they could never have predicted the tragic outcome, very sad for all involved.

EverlongLovesHerChristmasRobin · 10/12/2012 06:55

I really can't get my head around what seems like empathy from certain posters for the dj's.

They only have themselves to blame for whatever they might be going through right now.

Let's hope this is a lesson learned all round. Doubtful though.

CabbageLeaves · 10/12/2012 07:02

I feel sympathy with the DJs because they are the public faces bearing the brunt of the reaction and their culpability is in my mind far far far smaller than that of the stations managers and advisors.

It was ill thought out. It was going to cause harm. Members of staff would lose their jobs and they had the chance to not broadcast.

I agree that failures occurred in the management of the communications in the hospital. One of those failures is allowing calls to get through to a nurses station.

Managers are to blame here....on both sides

Swipe left for the next trending thread