Seven ‘cleared’ over outing of politican

“High Court Justice David Kirby”?

Yes Seven was vindicated so much thaqt Adam Walters was taking off macqaurie Street within days and his careeer is now in terminal decline. Walters is damaged goods – and righlty so.

Seven are still trying to repair the damage with labor and liberal staffers alike who were appalled by his actions.

Tawdry all round.

This is a seriously appalling decision, and highlights the total lack of accountability the media has in this country. The amount of damage they are able to do to individuals and organisations with impunity is nothing short of frightening.
Politicians and public servants have so much accountability, they can barely do their jobs – but show me the law, regulation or even the Constitutional mention that enshrines the media’s right to do this sort of thing ?
After this little episode, it’s clear that ACMA is not remotely interested in accountability or helping provide redress to an individual who is damaged by the media.

This really got to me as it was a grab for ratings at any cost. I don’t agree with David Campbell’s alleged lifestyle (in the sense that he is married with children and may be committing adultery).

However, I don’t think that it had anything to do with his work ability and lets face it, if we outed every adulterating person from their positions, then there would not be many people in positions of power.

Who knows what kind of agreement he had with his wife. She may have already known he was gay and they simply never divorced for public appearance sake and if this wasnt the case, then I am sure there would have been other ways to handle this information.

Now he, his wife and children have had to deal with this personal issue in the eyes of the public. Not good for anyone’s mental wellbeing.

Not Humane & Disgraceful behaviour by 7!

Have to disagree, chaps.

Campbell was leading a double life, posing as “respectable family man” for his south coast voters while secretly indulging in his steam-room dalliances.

If he was honest and had nothing to hide, he should have come out, been proud to be ‘out’ and unashamed of his sexuality and stood for election as a gay man – but he knows how that would have gone down with his electorate.

Seven got him to rights. Had this been a straight married man seeing hookers on the side, a senior cabinet member, a police minister, and using a commonwealth car to get him to the brothels and possibly being at those places when he should have been on the job (ahem!) [cv: central coast motorway meltdown] then he’d have been equally fair game.

@ Jack.
What’s with the ‘chaps’ thing?
I bet you are a subcriber to the Dirty Diggers paywall, The Times, to adopt that terminology.
Mumbrella, ‘jack’ is not a ‘throw in’ to garner a response by any chance? Because he seems so obviously obnoxious. Not someone normally associated with your site. If not, why did you expose this hatred?

Oop’s. subscriber.

This finding by ACMA makes me wonder when in a politician is actually off the job if what he says and does outside his political work makes him fair game. What other occupations would this extend to. Let me see……journalists?

@ Jack, My point was that journalists and the media should not have the right to play ‘judge’ and ‘jury’ , as essentially that’s what has happened here (investigative journalism into massive scandals are completely different to what this was).

All we know is that he walked out of a gay spa. I had a friend walk out of a ‘rub & tug’ after going to a bucks party and he told me that he never realised that it was that type of establishment until he was in there. He said that he remained in the communal spa (where nothing occurs) until he felt it was safe to get his clothes and get out….I also had another friend go in the same type of establishment thinking it was a genuine ‘chinese massage’ business, again he left quite quickly.

If these 2 friends were in the public eye and their partners found out through seeing photos in the media, then they would have a lot of unnecessary explaining to do and possibly lost trust with their partners (a massive deal).

What were Mr Campbell’s motivations for being in there? This question was not asked prior to the release of the photos and that is the underlying issue.

This is bottom of the pile tabloid journalism.

@Kate: First, I’m not an alter-ego or comment-bait for Tim. Secondly, what’s with your incredible over-sensitivity? You describe my comment as “hatred” but I fail to see any hatred in my post – just the expression of my take that Seven was within rights to do this. I didn’t come down on homosexuals. “Hated?”. Give me a break.

@Tim: well, if there was a straight equivalent of Ken’s of Kensington – a place where guys and girls went for no-cost sex, swinging or whatever it’s called – then that would be even worse for a minister etc. So I do maintain that there’s no double-standard in this aspect of media coverage: straight or gay, those activities are fair game to be reported and exposed.

Jack, there is no reason for a politician to be reported for seeing a hooker or going to a brothel unless he is voting against them etc.

Prostiution is perfectly legal – people’s sex lives, including pollies should be off limits generally.

David Campbell was a dreadful minister in my opinion who helped turn this town into a police state for the APEC meeting a few years back, but he deserved to be fired as a minister for that and many other bad decisions, not for how or with whom he has sex.

Everyone likes or wants sex – its part of life and pollies are no different. As long as they are not trying to make illegal what they themselves are doing and thus open to hypocrisy claims, I can’t see what business it is of the publics.

Trust Michael Kirby to be scathing of Channel 7 – them being ‘serial homophobes’ etc. For my money, the real issue is about David Campbell and his dubious behaviour, and, one might add, his undeniably risky and foolish actions. In light of the aired ‘scandal’, the question about his stunning lack of morality concerning his marriage certainly came to light. This man’s whole political career no doubt partly came about through his paying lip service to the conventions and ‘norms’ of social behaviour. A double life behind the scenes was always going to upset his balance at some stage. Perhaps, in a unique way, Channel 7 was playing the role of Devil’s Advocate and forced him to face the reality of his risky circumstances. He has a better chance of finding a stable foundation in his life now that the truth is out.

It seems as though the political system needs more individuals who have strong moral fibre and honest life habits. They are role models if they like it or not and should be open to scrutiny concerning their foundation character. David Campbell was shown to be a less than satisfactory choice of social leader through the most unfortunate of circumstances.