★★★★★ 0/5

Pictures at any cost

A woman wails over a corpse in her backyard in Melbourne yesterday while a Nine News chopper flies overhead.

32
Leave a comment

A woman wails over a corpse in her backyard in Melbourne yesterday while a Nine News chopper flies overhead.

As she sobs over his deceased body, covered by a blanket, they shamelessly film the scene denying her, and two women with her, all privacy.

Get the pictures at any cost.

Blaze it across the 6:00 News.

Is it only because the man was the patriarch of a family well-known to police that such pictures were used?

Would a blonde, blue-eyed mother from Camberwell be subjected to the same exposure if she were mourning over her dead son in the middle of the street?

What are the rights of family members at a time like this?

Where do you draw the line between privacy and Public Interest -and could the magnitude of the crime not have been relayed without them?

The picture is currently being used by The Age and the Herald Sun.

32 Responses

  1. I think your all over re-actiing… its news! its that simple! and all networks would of used that footage or filming it.. David..iam not sure why u even made you point! were u trying to have a go at nine??? shame on u!
    the public has the right to know what is going on…. nine or any other media outlet would of done the same!!

  2. You can’t go on to someone’s private property and film without permission, so there should be a law regarding the height or aerial distance of which someone is allowed to take images from, or of above someone’s private property.

  5. The Victorian government made an announcement the day before about restricting the media’s ability to intrude on privacy for ‘news-worthy’ stories. Specifically it was about mobile phone footage of staged fights – but the Justice Minister Rob Hulls made a pointed reference to the media intruding on people’s private lives.

    Maybe this was a challenge from Nein to the government… to see if they’d publicly call on the media to respect a crime lord’s privacy.

    Hear that silence?

  6. In today’s world there is no privacy – everyone puts their time onto various networking sites to reveal aspects of themselves which would have been unheard of a decade or so ago.

    One like the lady in question cannot grieve in private anymore – if its cannon fodder for a news network desperate to fill in airtime then so be it.

    It’s shameful on Ch 9 to do that – but it appears that these days the network has very little shame when it comes to uncovering anyone’s personal moments.

  7. Horrible ploy from a despicable network. Almost as bad as when they showed the footage of the winter Olympian dying earlier this year (that was the only time I have ever called a network to complain).
    No wonder they are no longer number one with this tasteless journalism there news is fast declining like ACA (remember when that was a ‘reputable’ news program?). Say what you will about 7News (too tabloid for my liking (Dannii Manogue’s baby was their lead story for a week-nine also covered it)) they never sink this low. I honestly don’t know why anyone bothers with 9 at all any more!

  8. Absolutely disgusting but David, in this case, I think I have to agree with others that these images would have been televised even if the women were Aryan Super-beings.

  9. I have to sadly agree – Camberwell blonde wouldn’t be exempt.

    Note equally sadly the MEAA Code of Ethics:
    MEAA members engaged in journalism commit themselves to honesty, fairness, independence, respect for the rights of others.
    [and including specific point:]
    11. Respect private grief and personal privacy. Journalists have the right to resist compulsion to intrude.

    Wonder if anyone involved was a union member? Then again it’s “only a code” – can’t be bound by it now can you?

  10. In my opinion this family chose to put themselves outside of the law so they don’t deserve the protection of the law. They obviously don’t respect society so why should they be respected by us?

    And before anyone accuses me of racism let me state that I felt the same way about Carl Williams and his ilk. If you live by the gun you die by the gun.

    What Ch9 did was disrespectful and shady, but we all know that’s how they operate and I won’t be watching them or supporting them anyway. I reckon if more people voted with their remotes this behavior by TV stations would change.

  17. The ABC also showed a brief grab from the Nine pictures on the 7pm news, really really distasteful. I don’t understand how this sort of footage gets through the entire editorial process without people realising that it’s incredibly disrespectful to splash it across the TV. But of course Nine will get a slap on the wrist at best, and them and Seven will keep on doing this sort of thing with impunity.

  19. “Would a blonde, blue-eyed mother from Camberwell be subjected to the same exposure if she were mourning over her dead son in the middle of the street?”

    If they were from a notorious crime family then yes it would get the same exposure.

  20. Well nine just wants to make sure it can say in its latest promo ‘you saw it first on nine news’ so who really cares about their ethical and moral obligation.

  22. Actually David, “they” – meaning television, the press, and the radio – have been intruding on people’s grief for years, so, yeah, a blonde, blue-eyed mother from Camberwell would be subject to the same treatment. It’s inexcusable.

  23. Oooh sorry David, did you think this was for 9 News, of course not, they were storyboarding for Underbelly 4 :p

    In all seriousness unfortunately its a race to the bottom between 7 and 9, and their ‘News’ service. They may as well have poured petrol on the fire of this ‘war’ with shots like that, but I guess thats what they want….No News is good News mantra seems to have been burnt and its ashes urinated on.

    Why not shove pictures like that down everyone’s throats and hope that the revenge attacks keep going…. terrible way to manufacture more “News”

Leave a Reply