Ten’s Hugh Riminton wins Fairfax apology over Sam De Brito column
Ten’s political correspondent Hugh Riminton has revealed that he took legal action after being defamed in a column by Fairfax writer Sam De Brito earlier this month.
Writing in today’s edition of The Australian, Riminton said that De Brito had alleged that he had used the words “Don’t you know who I am?” in a bust-up with airport custom officials.
De Brito’s column – All Men Are Liars (Except Sam De Brito) runs in both the Sun-Herald in Sydney and Sunday Age in Melbourne.
But Riminton said that the incident never took place and he was not even at an airport at the time De Brito claimed he’d uttered the words.
In his item for the Australian, Riminton said: “My faith in the management of the Fairfax press has been dented and I would rather it had not happened.”
So, All men are liars (including Sam debrito)?
Ironically, it seems Sam de Brito doesn’t actually know who he is.
Hard-hitting affair.
Nice one Hugh! Now maybe Fairfax will think seriously about scrapping DiBrito’s awful column. One of the worst in Australia – and that’s saying something!
Retch! Can’t stand thin-skinned journos who threten legal action, particularly over something so trivial.
Hi Pooten,
It’s worth a read of Hugh R’s piece on The Australian. He makes the point that he never expected to be one of those journos…
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
As a fan of Sam’s blog I don’t remember this one – have you got a link?
It does sound poor and sloppy, and a shame that once something like that is in print, no amount of apology can retrieve it.
@malcolm Disagree with your assessment of Sam de Brito. As a leftleaning femonazi, I love his column – he’s not one of the namby pamby PC commentators. Always a bit of fun, honest (usually) and irreverent.
Completely agree with Malcolm. Sam’s column is truly awful and I won’t print an apology for saying so. He is a smug bastard.
Probably one of the nicest and most respected journos in the business. He has a great reputation that’s worth defending.
If Hugh was a muck raker for a tabloid or 6.30 program you may have a point Pooten but he’s about as far from that as a TV journo can be without being on ABC. Good on you Hugh.
I might have missed something here…but hasn’t The Australian’s media diary (formerly by Amanda Meade, now by that gawd-awful vain Caroline Overington) gone downhill ever since Overington took over? It’s puff, it’s soft, it’s all hot air and souffle…all the substance and meat has gone out of it. What a shame. It’s no longer even worth reading, what with all its anti-ABC bile and pro-Sky guff.
Finally there’s a deluge of the public’s opinion on Sam de Brito – his arrogance and smug attitude makes me feel ill, and it brings down the intellectual atmosphere of both papers he appears in – get rid of him. No-one is interested!
Fair play Hugh!
I am an online journalist and was shocked that one journo would sue another.
But I was wrong. It was not another journalist, it was Sam de Brito.
Perhaps this will break down the ‘throw it up and fix it later’ approach of some online scribes.
Couldn’t agree more with Kate and Malcom. Sam de Brito is a complete hoax and how he got a gig as a journalist is anyone’s guess. His column is extremely mundane and his books are even worse. Get rid of him. Stat!
@Claudia Don’t you mean irrelevant?
The column in question appeared in Sunday print editions only – not in de Brito’s online blog.
This was an elementary mistake by an experienced journalist, a real shocker. No alarm bells heard by the editors either.
Which is ironic – de Brito’s online work is frequently outrageous. Sure, it can be self-serving and smug, and like all opinion writing tends to be, well, opinionated.
But he’s been mining a very interesting vein of Aussie male self-analysis, and if the columns aren’t always entertaining – they usually are – the comments they provoke make for fascinating anthropological study.
Look, I declare my interest and say I am a friend of de Brito and work with him. Whatever your take on his column, let’s be clear – he’s been a journo for almost 20 years and this is the first time he’s been sued, and only the second time he’s ever had to publish an apology.
How many times has Riminton been sued? So much for the “confidential settlement” eh, Hugh?
Hat trick Jones,
You’re right about the Australian’s Media Diary under Caroline Overington. Take today’s:
Item 1: Talking up News Limited; Item 2: Talking up a friend (or it certainly sounds like it); Item 4: Putting down News Limited rival Fairfax; Item 6 Talking up News Limited; Item 7: Talking up News Limited AND putting down Fairfax; Item 8: A disguised correction to a knocking piece about the ABC from last week; Item 9: Knocking piece on the ABC; Item 11: Snide swipe at Fairfax.
Craig, sometimes it’s who you know, you know? Sam de Brito only got a journalism gig because his daddy was a well known journo. As a writer, he’s about as talented as a turnip. The funniest thing is the man’s ego is so enormous he probably thinks it’s his brain that got him where he is today. He’s an uneducated swine.
Thank you all for your interest.
For the record, the Sunday Age also ran the de Brito article but edited out the false references to me.
The Sunday Age was plainly awake at the wheel, where the Sun-Herald editors were not.
My appreciations to Gay Alcorn and her team.
Hugh Riminton
Oh, and to “The Lurker”, I have never been sued.
+1 to the brito-bashing, maybe he is actually reasonably smart but I don’t know how he willingly publishes such generic, meaningless topics. quote from his latest blog synopsis: “How’s this for a theory? The more obsessed a woman is with clothes, shoes and handbags, the more utterly barren her interior life.” I think there are a few other issues here especially the way The Age has let their weekend supplements turned to s—.
If anybody deserves a column it’s Schembri or David Cameron tbh.
go Hugh
Good on you, Hugh. This may seem trivial to some but most of us know better – an outright fabrication, and such a personally damaging one at that, is where you gotta draw the line. I don’t care who was the journo at fault. You did it right.
Jesus Jack – journos get let down by their sources. I very much doubt de Brito fabricated anything, it sounds like he just had bad information.
Sam de Brito is a bit like the big-mouth drunk who gives lectures at the bar to anyone who will listen. He thinks he knows stuff. He never shuts up. If people disagree with him in “his” bar he abuses them, and he goes home every night thinking he’s proved himself the big man yet again, when all he’s done is shown how sadly limited his thinking really is.
Oh, and Sam, I don’t work in a call centre.
I could not agree more with the sentiments expressed above by both Hat trick Jones and Anonymous about the decline of The Australian’s Media Diary under Caroline Overington. This week’s attempt to talk up a fellow journo’s chances of landing a new gig was embarrassingly transparent. Sending out public cheerios to your friends… isn’t that what Facebook is for? Certainly fails to make for interesting reading for the general public in a newspaper
Hi Brett,
While that’s fair comment, one thing to bear in mind is that I suspect the reason they’ve put Caroline Overington on the diary is that she’s a good writer. But what she doesn’t (yet) have is the detailed knowledge of having been on the beat.
I suspect that in six months it will be a much better offering.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
The problem isn’t DeBrito, although he did get it wrong.
The problem is with Fairfax, which has laid off so many subs that basic standards of fact-checking are no longer observed. Once upon a vanished time, a sub would have read the copy and asked the reporter, “You sure about this? He could sue.”
Sam, presumably, would have responded that he got the info second-hand, and the sub would have changed to “a well-known” media personality.
The real problem with Fairfax is that there are no longer any decent backbench editors to ask the right questions.
Does anyone know if the column was subbed by PageMasters? If so, it makes my point: comma crunching, not editing.
Bold Type: the Sun Herald article would have been subbed by Pagemasters, but I believe the Sunday Age copy is still being subbed in Melbourne.
French maid: Thanks for that info. If the Sunday Age is subbed in Melbourne or elsewhere, it is very hard to tell.
Can anyone show me what was actually said? and with context?
It seems Sam has pissed a few people off (he’d like that) but I expect from the amount of hate he cops on his blog most of this predates the Hugh issue.
Personally I read his threads each week and find them equal parts of interesting, amusing, entertaining and insightful.
Oh and I really enjoyed his novel “The lost boys” judge me on that as you will its probably not destined to become the literary classic of our time but I don’t know anyone who has taken more than 4 days to read it.
“Writing in today’s edition of The Australian, Riminton said that De Brito had alleged that he had used the words “Don’t you know who I am?” in a bust-up with airport custom officials”
OK, so the implication here is that Hugh is a “tosser”.
By reacting with “legal action” doesn’t he more or less validate the implication rather than completely ignoring, and therefore, downplaying the issue.
The funniest part is that by writing his little get square for the Australian, he’s ensured the phrase “Do you know who I am?” is now linked to Hugh Riminton on search engines. I’ve Googled the original column and it looks like Fairfax aren’t putting it online, so he’s given it life on the internet where it would have died with the print version.
Ah yes the typical online over reaction, under cowardly anonymity. Easy isn’t it?
I really enjoy Sam de Brito’s AMAL blog. It’s entertaining. I suspect the detractors here find him equally entertaining to read, or they wouldn’t know his work.
Maybe Belinda Neal could sue for plagiarism. Isn’t that HER line?
That’s a fair point, In A Perfect World.
I find his column preachy and annoying – and read it every week.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
#38 mumbrella
I know.
Thanks for entertaining us Sam.
Can someone explain this to me?
In that link to the Australian article, Hugh Riminton says “the paper offered an apology and the rest is covered by a confidentiality agreement.” And then he goes on to write about the whole thing? Isn’t that “covered by a confidentiality agreement?”
I read the piece and find his line that “commentary on my character followed. It was nasty stuff,” rather amusing.
The commentary was “Do Hugh Riminton’s neighbours even know who he is?” I believe. Sounds like someone’s rather large ego got wounded more than anything.
Sam who?
I think “Hugh who” sounds better, especially if you are trying to attract someone’s attention.
give sam a break, sure h’s got an ego, but who doesn’t in media these days.
I enjoy the good natured banter on his blog each week. I’m sure he would be the first to admit if he was wrong. Elen, how do you have time to be on this blog, aren’t there phones that need answering?
Ahhh so easy to be a hater, especially an anonymous one!
I can understand why Hugh would be pissed at the misquote but by reacting this way he has proved himself to be a bit of a tosser.
I personally enjoy Sam’s blog and style of writing, does he come across as slightly arrogant? Maybe, but he is also a smart, funny and a talented writer.
Sam seems like the sort of bloke you could have an intelligent converstion with, but also a beer or two.
Poor Sam blah, blah, blah… HE WROTE BULL$HIT! He didn’t check it. Are you lot also members of the “But Matthew’s a really good actor” club too? Moving on…
DeBrito’s column is great. He made a stupid mistake, but he’ll no doubt be a better journalist from it. Move on, people.
Be interesting to see what columns / blogs those who hate De Brito’s column actually do like. Those who know the least about a subject invariably shout the loudest about it. Maybe they’re just spineless trolls who find it gratifying being nasty and anonymous.
As for De Brito’s dig at Rimington, he admit he made the mistake. He’s human. Flawed like the rest of us. And I’ve never found his tone smug. Glass houses n all that.
@Albers 42 – best comment of the blog.
“Tristan 35 – I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. The old PR saying that “any publicity is good publicity”?
There mere fact that only one of these journalists has found it necessary to comment on this blog speaks volumes.
Hooroo x