Re: And while you weren’t looking

Stephen — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:18:21 -0000

"NSW Traffic Services Commander John Hartley said: ‘If they walk in front of a car, make the car swerve to miss them and the car hits a tree and kills or injures the driver or passengers in that car, they could be liable for very serious offences.’"

Yes. Which happens all the time because the people in question have no eyes.
It's not in anyone's interest to get hit by a car, I can't possibly understand why this is a widespread problem.

Re: Woohooooo, another free speech victim bites the dust

Stephen — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 07:17:52 -0000

I don't consider it to be damaging to the general cause of freedom of speech and I'll explain why.

Austereo were not forced by any regulatory authority to suspend the radio show. They did this voluntarily after gauging public reaction to the stunt. If they chose to ignore the overwhelmingly negative response it received they faced the prospect of damaging 2Day FM's public image (further). Add to this further negative publicity and possible boycotts, and it was undoubtedly a decision made with financial and corporate viability in mind, and not in spite of it.

That, and I think free-to-air radio is a fucking joke to begin with and expecting any sort of standards from 2Day FM is a waste of time.

Do you disagree, Dan?

Disqus - Latest Comments for dieburndie

Re: And while you weren’t looking

Re: Woohooooo, another free speech victim bites the dust