/ Journalist who made hoax calls to MRT could be jailed.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Toby S 03 Sep 2010
http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/news/100903hoax.shtml

Sounds like the individual in question has 'issues'. Not sure that I agree with a prison term in this instance, as far as I know no real emergencies were delayed as result of her actions. Maybe a fine (costs of callout to the MRT's concerned) and a few days volunteering with the teams? Not on rescues obviously but I'm sure they could always do with a hand with paperwork and cleaning the vans
Scomuir 03 Sep 2010
Toby S 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Scomuir:

I remember that one. Breathtakingly idiotic!
MHutch 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:

http://outdoors.caledonianmercury.com/2010/09/02/skiddaw-hoax-journalist-found-guilty/001168

She almost certainly does have issues, but if this report is to be believed, the act itself was quite calculating - during the time of the Cumbrian floods, when MR were aiding in West Cumbria, she decided to 'test' whether they still had the capacity to carry out hill rescues, with the idea of selling the story of the 'outcome'.

So, even if no genuine rescues were delayed, the potential for this was very high. Utterly moronic, and a short stay at Her Maj's pleasure would not be completely out of order - although I guess that's unlikely.
Blue Straggler 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:


Interesting in the Paul Manchester story though:


"He apologized to the rescue team and offered to make a donation of £2,000 or $3,200. They turned it down but asked that the money be given instead to the local Highland Hospice, which lost over a million dollars in the past year that had been invested in a failed Icelandic bank in the financial crisis.

While Paul Manchester did an inexcusable, stupid, and adolescent action by raising a false alarm, he did the adult thing by taking responsibility for his actions. As he told the court, "It's very embarrassing and I'm full of regret. I've not been up a mountain since.""
Tom G 03 Sep 2010
In reply to MHutch:

I would have to say the punishment should be the same as for those who make hoax calls to Fire Brigade, Police, Ambulance. Just because it didn't have an adverse outcome on that one occasion doesn't mean that it mightn't have on another day.

Scumbag with nothing better to do with his time, as if the MRT had nothing better to do with their time. It's almost worse for volunteers because they end up wasting a whole day on their day off.

Throw away the key...
nightmonkeyuk 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:
Definite prison sentance in my opinion, the longer the better. If only to serve as a deterrent to other people who might have equally stupid ideas.
Blue Straggler 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Tom G:
> (In reply to MHutch)
>
> I would have to say the punishment should be the same as for those who make hoax calls to Fire Brigade, Police, Ambulance.

What's that punishment Tom?
MHutch 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Blue Straggler:

Looking at cuttings, it seems that a short custodial sentence is an frequently-used option, although a lot of those jailed were more prolific hoaxers.
Tom Last 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Tom G:
> (In reply to MHutch)

> Scumbag with nothing better to do with his time, as if the MRT had nothing better to do with their time. It's almost worse for volunteers because they end up wasting a whole day on their day off.
>

With his time? Did you read the report?


> Throw away the key...


Oh dear.
Tom G 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Southern Man:
> (In reply to Tom G)

>
> With his time? Did you read the report?


> Oh dear.

Typing error, nothing more... jeez

As for throw away the key - typing in a hurry on busy day, BUT if someone had died elsewhere as a result, I think that wouldn't be such a bad idea.

RussMills 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:

I think a suspended sentence, a substantial fine and perhaps community service would be appropriate.
Toby S 03 Sep 2010
In reply to RussMills:

Agreed. I'm not sure that a custodial sentence would accomplish much. I'd much rather see her do some kind of community service involving the local MRTs. As I said earlier, there'll be lots and lots of muddy vans to clean
DaveHK 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:

It seems to me that journalists are prone to losing perspective in their pursuit of the scoop.

When I worked at the glasgow wall press people would sometimes phone up asking for details about Glaswegian climbers reported as missing or victims of accidents on the off chance that they were on our database.

They got short shrift.

Scomuir 03 Sep 2010
In reply to DaveHK:
Had the same when I worked in an outdoor shop - we would get calls when there were folk missing, or killed, to see if the staff knew any of the people involved. They wouldn't get anything from us either. Unfortunately, sometimes we did know, so probably just as well I didn't answer the phone on those occasions.
Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to DaveHK:
> (In reply to Toby S)
>

> When I worked at the glasgow wall press people would sometimes phone up asking for details about Glaswegian climbers reported as missing or victims of accidents on the off chance that they were on our database.
>
> They got short shrift.

In the thread about the Sun and the TV climb the reporter was criticised for not checking facts. Now you seem to be critising reporters for trying to check them. After you'd given them short shrift did you then join the chorus of complaints about the errors, I wonder? Damned if they do, damned if they don't, it seems.

Initial reports from police and MRTs are frequently wrong because of the chaotic nature of accidents and rescues and those mistakes are repeated in good faith by reporters who know about as much about climbing as I know about crown green bowls and working against deadlines. To my mind checking for details from a reputable source seems a praiseworthy thing.
Climbing accidents are news, like it or not, even on UKC. Just check out how often there's a thread on here about "Did anyone see the accident at X crag today?" It's usually dressed up with "I hope they are all right" but personally I can't see the difference between that and a reporter ringing up. Basically it's just plain nosiness and most of us are guilty of it. That's why newspapers still sell millions of copies every day.
Scomuir 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:
So, what you are saying is, the reports of the people who are dealing with the incident may not be accurate due to the "chaotic nature of accidents and rescues", and journalists shouldn't be blamed for not making enough effort to get the facts straight from the people who are best placed to provided that information, but it is OK for journalists to speculatively phone up people who weren't there on the off chance they can provide some unsubstantiated information? Amazing logic. I appreciate that it's how it works, doesn't mean it's right.

Tom G 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Blue Straggler:
> (In reply to Tom G)
> [...]
>
> What's that punishment Tom?

Hoax calls are illegal under Section 49 of the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 which states that: ‘A person commits an offence if he knowingly gives or causes to be given a false alarm of fire to a person acting on behalf of a fire and rescue authority’ (the relevant legislation in Northern Ireland is Article 23 of the Fire and Rescue Service (Northern Ireland) 2006).

Where that person is found guilty of this offence, in England and Wales they will be liable to a fine of up to £2,500, imprisonment of up to 51 weeks or both, and in Northern Ireland, they will be liable to a fine of up to £5,000 and/or imprisonment of up to six months.

Does that answer your question?
Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to Scomuir:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
> journalists shouldn't be blamed for not making enough effort to get the facts straight from the people who are best placed to provided that information, but it is OK for journalists to speculatively phone up people who weren't there on the off chance they can provide some unsubstantiated information?

Not at all. I suspect that by the time reporters are calling walls and shops they are looking for info on the casualty not the actual incident .
Once a name comes out I'd have thoughht it was good practice to try to cross check the info about the casualty, which is all you would expect to get from a wall. I'm utterly bewildered that people whinge repeatedly about inaccuarate reporting on clilmbing and then boast about blocking info. Not THAT is, to use your phrase, Amazing logic!

People at walls and shops might also help to head off some of the more general errors, such as the regular reports of "climbing" accidents on Striding Edge. The name will mean nothing to a non-cimber/walker but a shop manager might be able to explain that they are looking at a walking or scrambling accident but almost certainly not a climbing accident. But I guess to do that would deprive the rest of us of a change to whine and we wouldn't want that, now would we?.
OMR 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote: Well said, Mr Coyote.
Tom G 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

I think the main issue with people ringing up for information (whatever the motivation) is that they are not entitled to it as it breaches the confidentiality of the patient involved. That's why people are given short shrift. Even enquiring as to whether a specific incident as come to the hospital would still fall under confidentiality rules.
Wee Davie 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

For a wall employee to start disclosing any details about their customers to the press is morally wrong, even if it isn't legally bound by a signed agreement.
It's unlikely the fact that someone works as a receptionist at said wall would mean they could provide any more detail than the idle speculation you read on here.
I wouldn't be back to any wall where some desk monkey spilt beans about my info.
Scomuir 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

In reply to Wiley Coyote:
> (In reply to Scomuir)
> [...]

> Once a name comes out I'd have thoughht it was good practice to try to cross check the info about the casualty, which is all you would expect to get from a wall. I'm utterly bewildered that people whinge repeatedly about inaccuarate reporting on clilmbing and then boast about blocking info. Not THAT is, to use your phrase, Amazing logic!

I am utterly bewildered that you think it is OK for a climbing wall or shop to divulge potentially confidential information relating to their customers. If I had an accident, I certainly wouldn't want a climbing wall or shop giving out any of my details, whether it is to only confirm my name or not. I certainly do not understand why it is "good practice".

My point is, that the people dealing with the incident (police/mtn rescue) should be able to release enough information to allow a journalist to work out what's what (i.e. was it scrambling or climbing, confirm details of people involved if they consent to it, etc ). There should not be a need to start delving into the private life at any level of the person involved for unverified, unsubstantiated hearsay from anyone else, which is what you will get. A shop manager might be none the wiser about the situation when called, but decides to BS anyway. As I alluded to earlier, I have witnessed the occurance that, and it disgusted me at the time.

I have also been on the receiving end of reading fiction following an accident I was involved in. I declined to speak to the press, other than to confirm I was OK. I then read all sorts of ficticious nonesense regarding the event itself, specifically to the manner of the involvement of the emergency services. I did not want my details appearing in the paper, yet they did. I declined to provide any further comment as there was nothing to say, yet they just made stuff up, as they seemed incapable of reprinting the official statement without fleshing it out with the first thing that came into their heads. That is not the fault of the people involved, that is the fault of the journalist.
Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to Tom G:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
>
> I think the main issue with people ringing up for information (whatever the motivation) is that they are not entitled to it as it breaches the confidentiality of the patient involved. That's why people are given short shrift.

Ah, God bless confidentiality. Isn't that what all those MPs said about their expenses claims? By all means get on your high horse..... but only if you've never read a newspaper story or watched a TV bulletin that breached someone's confidentiality, such as the John Terry/Wayne Bridge saga. Or, just to bring it right up to date, I wonder if anyone asked all those Pakistanis up to their waists in flood wateron our TVs night after night if they minded the shots being taken as it might breach their confidentiality

Niall 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Tom G:
> (In reply to Blue Straggler)
> [...]

> Where that person is found guilty of this offence, in England and Wales they will be liable to a fine of up to £2,500, imprisonment of up to 51 weeks or both, and in Northern Ireland, they will be liable to a fine of up to £5,000 and/or imprisonment of up to six months.

Why do we have higher fines in NI? S'not fair! What about my human rights???
Wee Davie 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

I'm perplexed as to why you think the opinion of the average wall front desk worker could add value to a piece of journalism?
Typically they are students there for the cash- not as a hot source of tabloid quotes and not on first name terms with the majority of the thousands of wall members.
I agree that climbing accidents are poorly reported in general but far more useful quotes are already provided by MRTs etc already.
DJonsight 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Scomuir: Why should it not be OK to speculatively phone people. I can assure you that a journalist will not wilfuly waste his own time by calling around if he doesn't have to, and will try to call people who are likely to be able to help. That's what we have to do to get the facts behind stories - otherwise it's just 'churnalism' based on official releases and the media would be nothing more than a mouthpiece of the government.
If I'm covering a climbing accident I'll try to get to the scene, if not I will speak on the phone to police and MRT. They might give some details, which should be reported duly as 'police say' or 'Mr X said' rather than hard and fast fact.
They won't release names unless someone dies, then they release it about two days later when an inquest is opened.)
As all stories are much better if we know the caracters, I will then call arounfd and try to get a name. This is standard practice, and pales into insignificance in terms of inconvenience when compared to knocking on the door of a grieving parent half a day after their kid died. But it's all in the spirit of getting things out in the open, which I genuinely believe is the best place for things.
What I've never stooped to is calling the MRT out and then doing a story on how long it takes to respond. Good idea though...
DJonsight 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote: Why is Stiding edge not "climbing". I wasn't aware there was a strict definition. Are there climbers and "climbers"?
Perhaps we should copyright the term.
Scomuir 03 Sep 2010
In reply to DJonsight:


In my case, and this was some time ago, my name, age and address were given out by someone connected to the incident on the day. I arrived home the night of the accident, relieved that I could get some rest, only to have a journalist at the door not 10 minutes later. I wasn't best pleased, and in order to prevent some more colourful quotes to appear in the press, I did not let them in.

My mate did make the mistake of letting one in following an incident, and he also let the accompanying photographer in. The resulting picture was not only used in the press, but also appeared during the best mans speech at his wedding

If a person is involved in an accident, they may not want their details plastered across the press for various reasons. I nearly lost my job at the time (might have been a blessing in disguise right enough, but that's not the point) due to the boss considering it bad press for someone working in a climbing shop to have had an accident, and it become somewhat public. Whether they would have got away with it or not is irrelevant, but the point is it was a problem, which wouldn't have been one, had it not appeared in the press. You don't "have" to call around to get a name, anymore than you "have" to knock on the door of a parent as you describe, you just believe you "have" to.
DJonsight 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Scomuir: You don't "have" to climb, but if you do, you do "have" to be prepared to take the consequences.

I don't see that there's any shame in having an accident, any more than there is in being a victim of crime, for example, but people often don't want their names in the paper. Actually, I'm a softie and if people give me a good reason, I'll often do my best to keep them out.

Full marks to the reporters on your local paper, by the way, they were pretty damn quick of the mark.
Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to Wee Davie:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
>
> I'm perplexed as to why you think the opinion of the average wall front desk worker could add value to a piece of journalism?
>
Well because with luck there would be someone there who knows a bit about climbing and mountains and, perhaps even more importantly , don't forget with the average reporter you are starting from a low knowledge base so you don't need to know much to be way ahead of them.
Wee Davie 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

I think you summed the problem up by saying 'with luck'.
If I had an accident I wouldn't like to also have to suffer the 'bad luck' of having someone who knows nowt about the accident, wasn't there at the scene speculating on the spot in front of a pushy hack.

How can you honestly think this is a good idea?
The New NickB 03 Sep 2010
In reply to DJonsight:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote) Why is Stiding edge not "climbing". I wasn't aware there was a strict definition. Are there climbers and "climbers"?
> Perhaps we should copyright the term.

In winter it is considered a graded climb, an easy one, but a climb.

A number of 8000m peaks involve less 'climbing'.
In reply to Toby S:

Seems a pretty clear case for a jail sentence, akin to wasting police time, as someone said. Frankly it should be a policy aim of the courts to jail at least one journalist per week, and this seems like a good opportunity.

jcm
speekingleesh 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wee Davie:
>
> For a wall employee to start disclosing any details about their customers to the press is morally wrong, even if it isn't legally bound by a signed agreement.

They are legally bound, by the Data Protection Act.
winhill 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:

perhaps she was trying for a follow-up award:

BEST FEATURE ARTICLE
Sarah Crickmer – Small/Media&Large

Based where we are, in central London, we are prone to the London disease, i.e. everything north of Watford is a foreign country.

But we have to admit it, there´s plenty news outside the capital, and, what´s more there are plenty of people who aren´t interested in what London has to offer.

It´s a fact that a number of our former students find jobs in other parts of the UK.

The winner of this award is not listed on the programme which went to press too early to include her name. You have already seen a sample of her work and contacts on your tables.

She has married into a northern journalistic family and is making the most of her talents ´north of Watford´.

http://www.nosweatjt.co.uk/?mod=2&dp=65

She should have claimed that she was traumatised from having to shake hands with Charles Clarke and now has PTSD.
3leggeddog 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:

The hoax is even more distasteful when you hear the full story:

Journo rang police and insisted she spoke to wasdale mrt. Used the call out as a way in to try to interview their team leader, the fabricated story line to be that the mrt were too busy with the floods to provide cover (this was untrue, only wasdale's swift water folk were used). Wasdale team leader was on his way to a call out actually on his patch, skiddaw clearly is not and refered her back to police, who then called out keswick team.

wrt custodial sentence, I'm not sure but if she were a doctor, teacher or other professional behaving in a similar manner to do her job she would be struck off. In journalistic circles, she is probably being lauded
speekingleesh 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:
>
> Ah, God bless confidentiality. Isn't that what all those MPs said about their expenses claims?

Yes clearly some random hobbyist injuring themselves has the same public interest defence as a group of elected representatives potentially breaking the law.

> but only if you've never read a newspaper story or watched a TV bulletin > that breached someone's confidentiality, such as the John Terry/Wayne
> Bridge saga.

Again if someone makes money out of having a paticular image and this isnt the case in reality there is a argument for public interest.

>Or, just to bring it right up to date, I wonder if anyone asked all those >Pakistanis up to their waists in flood wateron our TVs night after night >if they minded the shots being taken as it might breach their >confidentiality

As far as I'm aware no-one has yet published a story where they have trawled though the personal history of one of the flood victims without their consent to try and flesh out this story...

Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to Wee Davie:

It's not the incident you are asking about but the person involved. After all it might be some bloke called Alan Hinkes. Means nothing to a non-climbing journo but ask someone in the know if they can tell you anything about them and a run-of-the-mill story suddenly goes to Page One.
I come back to what I said before, after a week of slagging reporters off for not being diligent in checking facts suddenly they are being slated for trying to get facts.
I just wish people would make up their minds which they want - slapdash or dogged?
Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to The New NickB:
> (In reply to DJonsight)
> [...]
>
> In winter it is considered a graded climb, an easy one, but a climb.
>
>I've done 3 winter routes in my life - horrible uncomfortable business - and stopped as soon as they invented sun rock. I've actually done Striding Edge in full winter conditions but even I can't convince myself it's a 'climb'.

However, just to avoid argument let's say for the purpose of this discussion it's a scorching mid-summer day. As a journalist you wil know better than anyone that most stories about 'climbing accidents' are actually about walkers on paths rather than climbing as we understand it

Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to speekingleesh:

Life will be so much easier once you have taken up your role of Confidentiality Tsar and can give us the benefit of your superior moral judgement. Until you do and are on call 24/7 to give your case by case ruling on what you deem confidential and who you consider fair game I guess we'll just have to make do with the rather imperfect and somewhat messy one-size-fits-all we have at the moment.
Wee Davie 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Wrong. I care about decent journalism.
What you are on about sounds like asking your local BP station till jockey to comment on the efforts to stop the Gulf of Mexico spill.
Dogged journalism or Mr Magoo style bumbling?



Dave Hewitt 03 Sep 2010
In reply to 3leggeddog:

I can assure you that in the journalistic circles I move and work in, Sarah Crickmer is not being lauded – very much the opposite in fact.
I wrote the CalMerc piece linked to by MHutch upthread, and have been covering the story since first getting wind of it in March – I’ve written four or five pieces about it, although mostly, because of sub judice constraints (which I think still apply – she’s not been sentenced yet), they’ve been bare-bones kind of things.
Took a while before being able to get hold of her name – at first, back in March, she hadn’t been charged, so the police weren’t able to say who she was apart from sex/age and general home area.
In terms of process, every journalist does things differently, but here I’ve mainly been keeping in touch with the Cumbria police press liaison people (very helpful), and also to a lesser extent with Andy Simpson, the England+Wales MR press officer (again very helpful – I got yesterday’s after-the-verdict quote from him by phone very speedily). Also tried to get a quote from Keswick MRT back in the spring, when it fist became clear it was going to court, but they declined – fair enough. Have now asked them again for a quote, no word back as yet.
I’m based 150 miles from the scene of the crime, so it’s been a case of doing things by phone and email. Had it happened just up the road I might have tried speaking to one or two people in person, but probably not – that’s not really my way of doing things – I’m not at all a doorsteppy/phone-pestery kind of journalist, although such methods definitely do have their merits at times. Were I living closer, however – or had access to an expense account – I would definitely have attended the court hearings, wanting to look her in the eyes etc (not that she actually showed up in court).
Unusual and interesting case, anyway, from both a journalistic and hillgoing point of view. I have family connections in Lakes MRT circles – not the team(s) involved here (which would have effectively debarred me from covering the story), but it added a certain interest to matters from my point of view. Not sure what the nearest equivalent incident might be – perhaps a notorious alleged multi-day callout in the Cairngorms around 15 years ago, after which the “victim” sold her story. But that didn’t go to court and nothing was ever proven, so it’s only similar in certain regards.
Padraig 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Dave Hewitt:

Any chance of a shorter version??? Jeez!
p
I always said there should be word limit on here!!
Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to Wee Davie:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
>


> What you are on about sounds like asking your local BP station till jockey to comment on the efforts to stop the Gulf of Mexico spill.

Only if you persist in thinking the question is "What happened on this crag while you were working 40 miles away?" rather than "Can you tell me anything about this bloke?" If the answer's "Never heard of him" you're no worse of put if it's "Oh yes. He was climbing on the telly last weekend" you have a story. That's the only purpose it serves. It's a long shot but some of the best stories come from long shots.


Tangler03 Sep 2010
In reply to Dave Hewitt:

Why would relatives in the MRT teams have debarred you from the story?
Dave Hewitt 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Tangler:

Well, maybe debarred was putting it too strongly. But had my connections been in the Keswick or Cockermouth teams I’d have had to declare an interest. And in such circs it would probably have made more sense for someone else at CalMerc to cover the story.
MHutch 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Dave Hewitt:

I'm a journalist too, as it happens, so my comment earlier in the thread doesn't exactly fall into the 'lauding' category...

Trouble is that all journalists tend to be conflated with the lowest common denominator in the profession.

Nice piece, by the way.
Toby S 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Dave Hewitt:

Good online newspaper that. Quite often browse it on a Sunday morning over breakfast.
Rubbishy 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Dave Hewitt:

In journalistic terms then, she is so crap she had to invent the cat stuck up the tree.
Dave Hewitt 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:

Ta. Mind you don't dip the corner of it in the muesli.
Dominion 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

> Ah, God bless confidentiality. Isn't that what all those MPs said about their expenses claims?

There is a vast difference between asking for information under the terms of the Data Protection Act and the Freedom of Information Act, to someone who has a legal right to access that information, and the circumstances of just giving that information out to someone who just phones up out of the blue.

One is a legal obligation, the other is almost certainly illegal under the terms of the Data Protection Act.

||-)
Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to Dominion:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
>
> [...]
>

>
> the other is almost certainly illegal under the terms of the Data Protection Act.
>
And that's why it's so much fun! As the old chestnut goes: News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising.

Dominion 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

That's not suppression, it's about verifying whether the person asking has a legal right to obtain the information.

People do have a right to privacy, and information from a database of customers at a climbing wall - for example - should not be given out to anyone who just phones up.

If, however, there is a legitimate reason, then it can be disclosed to the proper people. That is fair, and that is how it works.
Ian McNeill 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Toby S:

lock up and throw away the key .. much more serious that listening in to the queen ....

Ian
Blue Straggler 03 Sep 2010
In reply to John Rushby:
> (In reply to Dave Hewitt)
>
> In journalistic terms then, she is so crap she had to invent the cat stuck up the tree.

I reckon she'd been inspired by that bit in Crimson Tide where Gene Hackman runs a fire drill on the submarine during a real skirmish, and justifies his actions by reminding plaintiffs that a fire might start during a skirmish anyway so it was good practice. And that fat bloke George Dzundza died not cos of the fire drill but cos he was unfit. Gene said so.
Dribble223 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

So I'm assuming that some one, some where wanted to suppress the MRT from doing their job properly?

I hope this complete idiot gets the maximum possible sentence, and I really hope this curtails her 'career'.

'News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress' - what, like grief? Loss? Depression?. Where as celebrities accept the presence of (and need) the press, the general public do not expect to be descended on by vultures seeking blood, guts and column inches immediately after any personal tradgedy.

One of my best friends died a horrific and public death a few years ago - i will never forgive the press and its self righteous, egocentric 'got to dig up some hidden truth' mentality. the distress caused to friends and family was immeasurable.

You all just exploit any opportunity to write a catchy headline that will sell print or generate click through. Hey, its your job, but don't you ever claim that inane domestic affairs and personal tradgedy have anything to do with some greater journalistic right, and freedom of information.

Go report on human rights abuses in Rwanda, poverty and AIDs in Somalia, or maybe try getting to the bottom of regional corruption in Northern Pakistan. Then, perhaps, people won't just assume that all door knocking journo's are ambulance chasing oxygen thieves.


Just my opinion of course, I'm sure i've missed the point on how good a job this daft bint has done etc etc...

Wiley Coyote203 Sep 2010
In reply to Dribble223:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
>
> I'm sure i've missed the point on how good a job this daft bint has done etc etc...

Oh it stopped being about her yonks ago. The thread moved on to much more general knockabout after that.

As for the heavy stuff you'd like to see covered there's no shortage of that either, as I'm sure you'll know if you take an interest in such things.

Incidentally, just to get back to the lass at the start of this for a mo. Who, besides herself, says she's a journalist at all? She's described as a freelance journalist but any Walter Mitty can call themselves that. All that tells you is that she is not actually of the staff of any news media organisation. Is there any proof she has actually ever had a story published? It seems a bit odd for a journalist from South Shields to be holed up in a hotel in the Lakes trying to flam up some cock and bull story from Keswick when there was a genuine national ongoing story stil running in Cockermouth.
Dribble223 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Yeah, sorry for the general journo rant, women like this make me (and i guess most people) sick. I guess its the same as the legions of 'climbers' having 'accidents' each year, which generally turns out to be some tool wandering up a munro in jeans and a t-shirt in bad weather - i can see the point for clarifying details, I guess its just how you go about it. Sticking to the OP though, SURELY no actual practicing journalist is stupid enough to do something like she did?
Tom G 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:
> (In reply to Tom G)
> [...]
>
> Ah, God bless confidentiality. Isn't that what all those MPs said about their expenses claims? By all means get on your high horse..... but only if you've never read a newspaper story or watched a TV bulletin that breached someone's confidentiality,

Nothing to do with morality for me mate, it's more to do with the fact that you can be sued for breach of confidentiality. No high horse here...
Dominion 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Dribble223:

> SURELY no actual practicing journalist is stupid enough to do something like she did?

Other than the one who has been found guilty?

It's a daft situation, suppose someone on the MRT had a serious accident - broken limbs, even death - on her fake callout, or that someone in a genuine emergency situation had their rescue delayed because the team were dealing with her fake "call out"?

There is absolutely no reason why this person should not be given the maximum penalty that the law allows as she has done it purely on the grounds of research.

Well, her research should show that if you piss around with the emergency services and put in a fake call, then you go to gaol for 6 months.

Make it real.

||-)
Carolyn 03 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Well, my guess would be she pitched up in Cumbria after the floods looking for any story she could sell. She probably couldn't get accomodation further in than Keswick as Cockermouth was a touch damp. And she doesn't appear to have a strong grasp of local geography either. And in the absence of any easy to sell stories (well, every major media outfit was already well represented....) she decided to take more drastic action.

Anyhow. I reckon she should be sent out on some sheep rescues. Suitably scary and smelly community service.
The New NickB 04 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Can I ask why you have suggested that I am a journalist? I am not and more importantly whilst do tend to consider striding edge a walk in summer or winter, it is either a scramble, which is a form of very easy climb or it is a graded winter climb. I love to nit pick press articles, but this really is a non issues.

As to your general view about disclosing information to the press,I think you are well out of sink with general opinion and in this case I think general opinion is correct.
Wiley Coyote204 Sep 2010
In reply to The New NickB:
> (In reply to Wiley Coyote)
>
> >
>I think you are well out of sink with general opinion and in this case I think general opinion is correct.

Sorry. I mixed you up with someone else- that'll each me to try to reply to multiple responses at once.

As for being out of sync with public opinion I think that depends on how you measure it. Many (probably most) would like their own info kept confidential, many (tho perhaps not quite as many) would say the same about their friends. A still large number (no idea how many) would probably tell a market researcher likewise. But then umpteen million go out every day and hand over hard-earned cash for a newspaper that provides, and in some cases actually specialises in, exactly the kind of information they claim not to want to see. An even larger number read them. Most of the Sunday tabloids and several of the dailies contain little more than this kind of tittle tattle yet sell millions of copies which does make you wonder where these readers are when the surveys are taken, doesn't it?
jonny taylor 04 Sep 2010
In reply to Dominion:
> It's a daft situation, suppose someone on the MRT had a serious accident - broken limbs, even death - on her fake callout, or that someone in a genuine emergency situation had their rescue delayed because the team were dealing with her fake "call out"?

Why start bring up things like this. As far as I'm concerned it's enough to say - the team had been operating 24 hours a day during and after the flooding, despite the fact that several team members' own houses were being wrecked by the river at the time, and then just when they are starting to sort their own lives out and maybe even show up to work she makes her malicious hoax call.
ScraggyGoat 14 Sep 2010
In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Yes the press do commonly get a hostile reception from climbers. Quiet rightly so, they commonly sensationalise, often entirely make-up or fabricate whole sections of 'reports', mis-quote police and MRT, often jump to conclusions and write woeful pieces. Thats before we get to possible editorial comments.

Given that background, and likely outcome, is it any wonder that climbers tell the press to piss-off.

As a journalist its your house, and your also climber, you go and put it in order. Report non-sationalist, factually accurate pieces that get the basics right (e.g. getting the geography right), and journalists might get respect. But I gurantee this winter we will have a 'hills of death' front page at somepoint, and is a climbing death really front page news.......
ScraggyGoat 14 Sep 2010
In reply to ScraggyGoat:
Note I'm not dennying you to make phone calls or door step. But you must know why you generally won't get anywhere!!
thedatastream 07 Oct 2010
dominic_c07 Oct 2010
In reply to thedatastream:
Excellent result.
Tom G 11 Oct 2010
In reply to me32dc:

Indeed!
balmybaldwin 11 Oct 2010
In reply to me32dc:

Yes, seems about right, although I thought the MRT could have had fun with her if she was sentanced to 1 years community service with the MRT.

They could dangle her in a nice icy waterfall for a few hours every other day for "practice!"

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.