I don’t want to make this a “we’ll look they’re wrong so we’re fine” thing, but I will note - the unedited video Zempilas posted is clearly the same feed as Channel 10 posted, except Channel 10 didn’t show the first bit
Whereas our feed simply never had the first bit and that’s out of my control
The original tweet from 6 News only features the quotes from Basil. There’s no commentary associated with the quotes. The interpretation of those quotes came from the people replying as opposed to 6 News.
Sorry, but I don’t think they have done anything wrong here.
Did you approach Basil for comment prior to publishing the tweet?
I’m sorry if this comes across as harsh - but something doesn’t have to be “deliberate” to be misleading, unethical and even defamatory. A failure to do due diligence is absolutely driven by a desire to get what you thought was a gotcha moment uploaded as quickly as possible - for clicks.
The point is the selected quotes used by 6 News weren’t an accurate representation of the said conversation, quotes which resulted in two people being defamed. Relying on a single source is not due diligence.
May I suggest having an adult supervise you kiddos, especially as you’re using the internet without any parental supervision, or content blockers.
I agree with this but I think the circumstances here were pretty unusual when it was a raw press conference feed that by sheer chance began at the moment he asked about the tennis, with no apparent indication he had been engaging in a previous convo that would’ve seriously changed context (at least for me)
Highly unfortunate and again we’re reviewing our practices
In my view, even the previous conversation being there would also have many people (rightly or wrongly) interpreting his comment the same way. I would definitely have interpreted it the same because the previous coversation seemed distinct to the tennis conversation. Perhaps I’m biased because I’m not a big fan of him, especially with some of his other controversial takes.
Nonsense, your whole operation is dependant on clicks, the more the merrier and you’re quite good at confecting outrage from the loony fringes on social media.
Are you able to share a timeline of when 6 news viewed the footage to when you were tweeting about it implying Zempilas was denigrating women’s tennis?
wow, an online news channel relies on people clicking? amazing observation!
Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. Don’t disrespect your audience by telling us we’re wrong.
I will say this - i think it’s dangerous to publish a hot mic/gotcha moment when you’re not on the ground yourself or have joined halfway through a conversation without context.
That’s not to say you shouldn’t publish hot mic moments should you come across one - there’s plenty of stories that have come about from hot-mics, but you do have to realise in some cases you’re playing with people’s lives/livelihoods in doing so.
Literally every media organisation posted this clip without knowing the full context, coming in here to berate Leo (and his team) just cause he’s an active member of this forum ain’t it.
As well, though Basil has allegedly cleared up what the context was behind the comment, I and from what I’ve seen from others online, are still skeptical even hearing the wider context of the conversation (both the clip / explanation) that what he’s saying was what was meant in this situation.
My natural conclusion is still that he was talking about the Tennis, but we’ve all got our opinions.
Of course every media outlet published it following the storm that 6 News created with their clickbait video as it couldn’t be ignored. It derailed the announcement from Basil so it became the story.
The difference is that outlets with credibility published it with the context he was talking to a reporter about that reporter reading the news up against his wife on a different channel, but not at 6pm, implying the 9 reporter was a reserve call up.
If I were 6 News I would be crossing my fingers this morning that there isn’t a defamation notice in the mail. They’re probably very lucky that it is run by kids and the response to Basil for taking legal action against kids would be poor.
Either way 6 News has hurt their reputation in the public, and I would think harmed job prospects a little for some of these budding reporters.
There wouldn’t be grounds to sue for defamation as they apologised, it was a mistake, and they reported what they believed were truthful facts at the time.
Plus, in my opinion, Basil is a knob.
I’m not a fan of Basil, but apologies or corrections don’t protect 6 News from defamation action.
People have short memories, as well I seriously I think the second point is a little far fetched of a conclusion based on what happened.
Maybe not job prospects but there is now a large portion of people who haven’t heard the context (and never will) and now see Basil as this sexist from this and think he was referring to the women as reserves.
Again, not mutually exclusive to 6 News - the clip is still widely available and being reported online.
People will also draw their own conclusion as well, whether they buy Basil’s explanation is up to them.
That’s just the nature of the world we live in now.
Nine - including WWOS and SMH - posted the clip and credited a Twitter user who actually posted it before us, last I checked that got a few hundred likes
We literally did this as well the moment the facts became clear, and again, 10 seemed to have the full feed unlike us but chose not to use it!
Everyone can make plenty of comments now but the fact is a lot of people in my position seeing the original feed would have absolutely not realised there was a whole previous conversation because it really didn’t look apparent
As I’ve said more than once now, we’re reviewing our practices
You are definitely not alone in doing it.
To me it speaks to a disconnect between 9/10’s websites/socials posting it and their TV news reporting. I’d be intrigued to know whether they spent their reporters on the ground before posting it.
They’re a lot more siloed than you’d expect in a newsroom and this isn’t the first time web departments have gone a little rogue without context.