2DayFM lawyers seek emails to media watchdog ACMA about Kyle Sandilands ‘spider baby’ comments
Lawyers for embattled radio station 2Day FM are attempting to obtain emails between Mumbrella and the press office of the Australian Communications and Media Authority regarding an incident on the Kyle & Jackie O show.
(Updated at 3.15pm: 2DayFM now states the media outlets including Mumbrella were not the target of requests – see statement at end of this article)
Station owner Southern Cross Austereo has made the application under the Freedom of Information Act. ACMA has declined the request and Southern Cross Austereo has now appealed to the Information Commissioner.
It is unclear whether Mumbrella is the main target of Southern Cross Austereo’s application, or if it is part, as seems more likely, of a wider attempt by SCA to see the media regulator’s correspondence with the Sack Vile Kyle campaign.
This is a bit of a weird one.
I’m mystified why 2Day FM is so keen to know about my conversations with the ACMA about Sandilands’ spider baby remarks.
Not least because this is a case the network won more than a year ago.
Given that this was a story I chased 16 months ago, my recollections may be a bit vague, but luckily I wrote an opinion piece at the time which spells out most of it.
As I make clear in the piece, there was no mystery about the source of the story at the time – the audio of Kyle Sandilands’ spider baby jokes was sent to me and (if I recall correctly) various other outlets, by the Sack Vile Kyle campaign group. As their views were in the public domain – http://sackvilekyle.blogspot.c.....sting.html – the day before my calls there’s no secret source to protect from my end. That said, it’s still not a good look for anyone who employs journalists to be seen to go after material involving journalists researching stories.
At the time, as would be the usual case in this story, I rang the ACMA to find out what regulations might apply and to ask if any complaints had been made.
I could have saved SCA a lot of effort if they’d only asked me about the conversation. My email to the press office was pretty much to the point: “Good to chat just now. Here’s the audio I‘ve been sent. Speak later. Cheers.”
I think they later came back by phone to confirm they’d had no complaints at that point.
The material in question also includes some internal conversations within the ACMA about how to respond to my question about what regulation applied. Some of it is redacted but from what I’ve seen of the rest, if the Information Commissioner were to choose to release it all, I don’t think anyone will be embarrassed.
I suspect that Mumbrella’s involvement in this may be peripheral to 2DayFM’s coming legal battle with the ACMA over the Royal prank call suicide.
I’ve asked 2DayFM to let me know what they’re after. I’ll let you know if they tell me.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
As I commented at the time, if the baby had been born in Sydney (or elsewhere in Australia), there would’ve been widespread outrage. But, of course, a child born with a severe disability in a third world country is fair game to millionaires like Kyle and Jackie O. Comedy gold, in fact.
Having said that, your assessment was probably right — that is was unlikely to have broken ACMA’s rules.
It would seem to me that your also right about it being part of a wider effort by SCA to gather evidence in the royal prank case. that one should be interesting, as will be the upcoming inquest in the UK
As I also commented at the time Fitzy & Wippa also joked about the baby something nobody mentions