Amber Harrison: ‘Boys club still in control’

Amber Harrison has no regrets about going public with her affair with Seven West Media chief Tim Worner.

In an interview with ABC’s 7.30, the former Seven West Media executive assistant said, “I made a decision that I couldn’t go on without telling the truth and without telling it the way I did, so no, I don’t regret it.

“At the start this was about a spat with two people but this has turned into something very different.

“This is a company that signed me into agreements and then didn’t honour them, and the idea that I’m not supposed to stand up for myself when that happens is wrong.

“This is not about a relationship, this is about what the company did next and it always has been.”

Seven maintains her social media posts had breached a confidentiality agreement in which the company agreed to pay her $427,418 in instalments for her silence.

But Harrison says she went public because the deal fell apart and she did not receive the money.

“I didn’t get that money. I signed a deal, yes, but as soon as it was signed the deal fell apart and I just decided … that I couldn’t get into the court system and the court system wouldn’t serve me as an individual, and I went public to tell the truth, to tell my story,” she said.

This week a judge ordered her to pay Seven’s legal fees, after she agreed to an order banning her from speaking publicly about her affair or confidential company information.

In a statement Seven welcomed the outcome and said it looked forward to putting the matter behind it.

But Harrison, now facing bankruptcy told 7:30, “I think the boys club has shown that they are still, for now, in control, but we can change that and we will. I think we’re seeing examples of that with the AFL and we are, we can change cultures.”

You can see the full interview at ABC.

11 Comments:

  1. I lost any sympathy for her when she decided to start naming other parties (women, I believe), without their consent, who had also had affairs. I don’t think she’s a victim at all. I think there were a multitude of different ways she could have gone about this. She wanted hush money, she didn’t get it, and decided to try and hurt as many people as she possibly could.

  2. Hope this is not a cruel joke but I have to – when is casting for next year’s “I Am A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here”? Or maybe Dancing With The Stars on a different network?

  3. I also want to add that (in my opinion), the moment someone signs that confidentiality agreement (or what I would call ‘hush money’ agreement), they are already perpetuating the alleged ‘boys club’ mentality. Why not refuse to sign the agreement, go all out to the public and expose this alleged behaviour without being bound by any legal consequences? She could have gone to the lawyer/police if she was being pressured. That would be much more noble. But of course I am not a lawyer so maybe a bit naive.

  4. This woman really doesn’t know when to cut her losses does she? She can pretty much kiss goodbye any lenience 7 may have had with regard to their costs with her latest media spray! Unbelievable…
    I also find her wording regarding the payout interesting, she is careful not to say she didn’t receive any payments, but states she didn’t receive “that” money (ie the $400+ K). She seems very astute at spinning facts to make herself appear as the victim.

  5. Don’t know why this is still dragging on. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned! Didn’t this woman plan a vicious campaign against a Nova executive when that relationship didn’t work out? And I recall I read somewhere that she allegedly stole money from a company when she was in UK? The decision by the judge says it all and anyone doubting that decision must have very little faith in our legal system. And just because the CEO didn’t lose his job doesn’t make the woman the ultimate ‘victim’ here. I don’t think there’s really a winner or loser here. As many people had commented before – it takes two to tango. As immoral as it is, it was a consensual adultery.

    I think I would have more sympathy for her if she refused to sign the confidentiality agreement…

  6. I am not really across the legal case itself so I won’t make comment on that but the fact Worner has had so little ramifications on the behalf of his actions shows what a boys club Seven must be. It’s truely unacceptable in my opinion

  7. If, as she said, 7 hadn’t paid the instalments as per the contract, then surely this would have been tested in latest court hearings, which to my knowledge wasn’t mentioned in his findings. I would think 7 would be foolish to not pay her, because she could then go to court and have the matter of non-payment heard in an open court. If your aim is to hush up the matter then non-payment is not the way to go, unless you make a judgement that you will get away with it.

    Yes, not everyone can afford access to the court system, but this doesn’t give you carte blanche rights to use social media to prosecute you case. There is a growing trend of using social media against businesses as a means to elicit go away money. It may be easier than going through the courts, but it comes with responsibilities that I am not sure some people appreciate.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.