Ethical conundrums

by Pete


It’s been a strange day.

1. A bloke dies, and is lauded for being a fantastic family man, brilliant at his work but totally?ignores the ignominious way in which he died, loaded on hard drugs, in a foreign hotel covered in vomit, piss and faeces? ?Should the true story be told? ?It would be unusual for this level of drug taking to be a one-off holiday thing. You just don’t jump to overdosing on meth on your first try. ?Yes, we need to be sensitive to his family and his friends, but there are questions about his workplace. ?Was it known and tolerated? ?Is he the only one or does the known culture of drug abuse continue at that company? ?

2. A well known single woman with a score of married blokes as notches on her bed post keeps on interfering?in other people’s lives without being invited to do so. These blokes are all high profile business people, political people and high powered lawyers, and you would know their names if push came to shove. ?Should she be warned to butt out before she does too much damage, or should she be outed for her appalling?interference at the risk of taking down a whole lot of marriages? ?It is remarkable the media have left this alone for so long. ?Eventually it will simply be too tasty to ignore.

And yet, we sit on our hands…. Who would have thought Whaleoil to suffer ethical conundrums?

One thing I’m getting tired of. ?People assume that inaction is equivalent to subservience, fear or tacit agreement. ?When in truth, it is the burden of knowing you can deal with these issues, but the resulting damage will be magnitudes larger than is ultimately necessary.

Such are the dilemmas we face. ?Hager said in court that “proper media” (as opposed to blogs) have this kind of judgement. ?But I can assure you, we exercise the same restraint almost every day. ?The question is: how long do you put up with kids kicking you in the shins before you backhand them across the room?