Nine rewards Scammers

cwIt’s pretty disappointing to see that Nine has reportedly given Clare Werbeloff an on-air role for a new show called Scammers.

The show is based on a UK format that warns people about scams or confidence tricks. A bit like network programming.

Werbeloff had 15 minutes of infamy after creating a false account of a street violence incident in Kings Cross and it became a YouTube hit.

Never mind that such incidents often involve innocent victims. Instead the media turned its attention to somebody who fabricated the events purely for media gain. And it’s been rewarded. So the best we can do is ignore the show altogether.

The move arguably follows TEN signing ‘MySpace partyboy’ Corey Worthington for 2008’s Big Brother.

But where will this lead to next? Actually committing a crime just to get a role on Funniest Home Videos?

Inmates. Asylum. You know the rest.



  1. Is this website owned by chanel 7 or something? It seems like this article is purely trying to disuade us from watching other stations? Deffinately a stab at the chanels themselves rather than a view on ethics.

    • Simon, if you check my About page you will see I am an independent media commentator. I write with passion and opinion. This particular article is now very old, but if you look at over 4 years of posts here I am sure you will learn that all networks have been praised and criticised at one point or another.

  2. Channel nine puts someone famous for fibbing in a show about being a good fibber and you all think that’s a bad idea? I wouldnt want her reading the news but id watch her spinning more crap and so would alot of people…even just to see her fail

    Ill give her one ep to prove herself.

  3. @ Reubot: “Which was the police wasting their own time.”

    So the Police should have ignored what she said to the News and not followed up what may have been a lead in the case, if she never said that to the News the Police would not have seen the need to question her account of the incident (if it was in fact true and the Police never followed up on it they would have been seen as ignoring evidence and there would have been another type of outcry), she only admitted to lying after the Police interviewed her remember.

    Guess we see this differently … just cannot see how the Police would have been able to determine she was lying until they questioned her account.

  4. where does it start and end…. ratings are needed to survive on TV (the News that run this grab), an opportunity for someone to get a start (the girl who said it), a freelance camera guy sees and opportuntiy as well to get a grab that nine run with …the girl thinks, heres my 15sec, now she gets a tv gig for at least a week, 9 try something , it doesnt rate and it gets pulled, if there wasn’t a requirement to have News all Tv places would pull the money eating machine that is News off the air and drop it…especially one like 9 news which doesnt rate anymore…. now with the people on the sidlines sledging people in the TV game…you know who you are…iam one..iam here as well…circle of life

  5. Who are the decision makers at 9? My God!

    The girl is being rewarded for fabricating a story. What are we coming too?

    She’s had her 15 seconds of fame, that is more than enough

  6. Nine really has no idea what people want to see.

    I’d boycott the network but there is not one program I currently watch on Nine so unsure on how to protest this stupid decision.

  7. I’m getting confused, I thought Nine would want to win the ratings year, not come out as the laughing stock of FTA and in 3rd place of the commercials.
    I’m still trying to remember when I watched an entire episode of a Channel Nine show. Should the even bother publishing a tv guide?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.