Michael Palaeologus

Hibbs - :) x SJ - :p x

How novel.

Great GB! Sorry LB!!

I have also created a Facebook page for the Curry Club. Please feel free to Like. http://www.facebook.com/EastDulwichCurryClub

OK, lets go with that. Next CC meet - Thursday 17 January @ Jaflong. Meet at EDT at 7.15ish for those that want to or 8.00 in Jaflong. http://www.jaflong.uk.com/

OK. how about next Thursday, 17 January? Jaflong?

Happy New Year. When would you like to go and where?

and "bite to eat"

I saw many of these in Berlin over the New Years, indeed there were some on the plane coming back to the UK. A worrying development.

Question is, when the Southern franchise comes up for renewal, will Overground bid and so potentially extend the Underground network at (relatively) small cost?

As a result of this thread I have started going to Iceland. I quite like it :s

Indeed Jeremy, indeed. Anyway, I for one have said all I have to say, so wont be posting on this post anymore. Thanks for what has been a very interesting debate.

Even if the intent is not to bully but just to "have a bit of fun", if the impact is that somebody feels bullied, its is bullying. That the media have been able to behave in this way for so long doesnt make it right.

It is interesting, "it was just a bit of fun" can be used to justify behaviour that others might find unacceptable. Particularly if they are on the receiving end. Particularly if that statement is followed by "you have no sense of humour" or "are you frigid?" or even, "are you a lesbian?" or similar. Followed by much chapish laughter. Followed by a profound and corrosive sense of hopelessness on the part of the recipient. Bullying does not have to be loud and aggressive, it is in some ways worse when it is wrapped up as light hearted banter that surely no right thinking person could possibly be upset by?

Otta, to be fair my vitriol is not actually at the DJs, although I think they have a question or two to answer but so does the radio management and the hospital management. I feel that we live in an increasingly polarised society that on the one hand sees ambulance chasing Solicitors making money from an increasingly litigious culture and on the other hand a tendency to wany to avoid jeopardy for the results of behaviour gone wrong. Maybe the two are connected? Society, I think, has rather glorified trivia and trivialisation. Media figures act without an expectation that they will be held account, thus a list of alleged paedophiles can be brandished at the Prime Minister by a minor TV celebrity without any thought that actually, this might be a bad idea. I enjoy Twitter as much as the next voyeur, but some of the participants forget (or ignore) that their tweets that slyly imply are potentially very damaging to individuals. This all adds to a view that popular public figures can act with impunity, say what they want with little concern for the results on often innocent third parties. As for all the other commenst, yes I too have been close to suicide. It is always complex, those that remain are left with a sense of guilt that never really goes away (and that sense of anger and betrayal and more guilt because you feel angry at and betrayed by the person that killed themselves) and so it goes. Finally, What reference to World War 2? I stated that that particular defence was discredited at a paticular point in time, I didnt imply anything else.

They are adults, albeit heartbroken adults, and so are answerable for their actions. "We were only obeying orders" was discredited as a defence after 1945. Of course the management of the radio station have something to answer for too. As the public voice/face of the radio station the now heartbroken DJs were happy to bathe in the warm glow of their notoriety, until it all went horribly wrong. They are not the innocent victims of management. They were at best complicit in the decison making that led to the prank call and the broadcast being made. Ironically, in an era of blame culture and mob mentality. The ED mob seems to want to wrap these two idiots up in cotton wool and protect them from the implications of their actions.

It is the broadcasting of the results of the prank call to the humiliation of the victim that is bullying, the prank call was made to be broadcast, the DJs made the call, therefore, they are bullies. That the broadcast would become a worldwide phenomena was inevitable, that the humiliation would thus be magnified many times was forseeable. They were unable to gain permission for broadcast, yet the broadcast was made. Promotion of the broadcast continued after it should have been taken down. Its a 24 hour radio station, time difference is no excuse. I am not saying that the DJs are wholly responsible for the suicide, but they may have contributed to the suicide. The DJs misery may well be heart felt, but that doesnt absolve them of some responsibility. This should be investigated and if they are found to be partially responsible, they should answer for that.

"Shattered AND Gutted" You will forgive me for being sceptical about the crocodile tears of two bullies who were found out in tragic circumstances. Lets save our concern and sympathy for the family of Jacintha Saldanha.

"The DJs were devastated", actually "Gutted" was the elegant phrase that they used. Of course they are gutted, their career is at an end and they have to answer questions about their conduct. Gutting indeed.

I agree with Otta's more finessed view - that the DJs actions may have had contributed something to the Nurses suicide, but they are not responsible for her death. A prank call to a hospital is not appropriate, asking for Patient information in that way is not appropriate, broadcasting the results is not appropriate. I am amazed that the Hospital does not have better security protocols.

Somebody gets in car and drives along quite safely, they answer their mobile phone, they run somebody over. Of course they didnt mean to run the person over, they didnt leave the house intending to harm anybody. However their actions in answering the phone contributed to them hurting somebody. Therefore there is jeopardy. This is not a "draconian eye for eye nonsense", dont be simplistic. This is people being responsible for the impact of what they do. As Quids notes, phoning a Hospital to seek information about a Patient is wrong. That it then may have led, in part, to a suicide, should be investigated and if it is found to have a causal link to the death, there is jeopardy. I do not think that they are entirely culpable, I think that they may be partly culpable because their prank and its broadcasting was bullying.

We seem to be swinging wildly from one extreme to another - the 21st Century culture of blame is wrong ergo, nobody is to blame. Twaddle. You cant legislate pranks out of existance, but you can ensure that people know that if they cause harm, there is jeopardy. The degree of jeopardy is dependent on the degree of harm caused. If no harm is caused, there is no jeopardy, if somebody kills themselves, then there is jeopardy. Not hard for anybody to understand and factor into their decision whether to prank or not to prank. Similar to any other part of adult life. Act sensibly, you are fine. Act like a cock and cause harm, you are not fine. That being the case, it is up to any given adult to make their own decision. As you say their is a direct implication of causality, albeit unproven. That is for the Police to investigate. I believe that if causality is proven, then there should be jeopardy for perpetrators of the prank. If there is no causal link, there is no jeopardy. However, if the latter scenario is the case, perhaps they will think twice before they prank again.

Miss P, its like going through a shortish tunnel on a normal train. The Overground trains are proper train sized AND there are no walls between the carriages, which makes looking down the length of the train as it goes rounds bends quite groovy. On the whole, a positive addition to the transport system.

How is it ever appropriate to phone a hospital to seek information about somebody who you have no relationship? That the hospital should have filtered the call out sooner is actually irrelvant to this issue, the call should not have been made. The call was made and as a result somebody killed themselves. There is causality. There is responsibility. I agree with e-dealer, the idea of "no-blame" is part of contemporary malaise which ducks responsibility for actions. I wouldnt credit the DJs with the title "Journalist", discredited though that is, "Irresponsible Light Entertainers" at best.

The DJs phone a hospital (full of sick people), record the resulting conversation and then broacast that recording for general public ridicule, this without the permission of those they recorded. Bullying, plain and simple. We condemn and act against bullying in the playgound, yet adult bullying that results in a suicide, well, nobody is to blame. The DJs are responsible for the results of their actions. That is in the nature of being an adult, we are responsible for the results of our actions. There was no negative reaction before the nurse's suicide because there nothing to negatively react to, at least as far as the general public was aware of. The anguish caused did not become clear until the suicide. There is no way of recording how many people, when they first heard of the prank, thought "what a pair of @rseholes", I did, but this was little reported in the media. The news of the suicide caused people to understand the ramifications of the "prank" and so condemn the perpetrators. The anguish of the DJs as they tried to justify themselves in the recent Australian TV interview has to be seen in the context of their bullying behaviour. Of course they are anguished, they are watching the media careers disappearing down the plug-hole. Lets save our sympathy for those who deserve it.