GUILTY: TRIAL BY MEDIA

I wrote on a meme today, that once upon a time, you actually had to COMMIT a crime to be found guilty. In the new world, however, you don't even have to be at the scene of the crime. Now, you are found guilty, sentenced and hung on the basis of a mere 'fallacious' fingerprint.

This comment was in response to recent events involving Union Royal Commissioner Dyson Heydon. He has been declared guilty by Media Trial for not attending a speaking event, organised by Liberal Party Lawyers. And yesterday, we had Andrew Hastie guilty of war crimes, that he was not involved in (apart from reporting the incident). Two men, found guilty when they were not even at the scene of the crime. If it wasn't so serious, you wouldn't be remiss for thinking this was the story line for a low budget political farce. But sadly, it isn't and the unblemished reputations of two good men are being tarnished.

It's a very worrying trend, when reputations can be ruined based on nothing more than mere spurious accusations or associations. Whilst many trials of late; such as in the case of Mr Dyson & Mr Hastie are most definitely politically motivated, the attack can be for any reason.

News media are the first to kick off politically focused trials (serving their political masters) but social media soon takes over. That's when we are regaled with the most vicious, slanderous attacks. A couple of twitter posts from yesterday highlight the extent.

THIS ONE WAS RETWEETED BY A LABOR POLITICIAN!!!

It’s a worrying trend and don’t think you are immune to media trial. None of us are. More and more employers read through their employees and potential employees social media profiles and threads and that research can be (& at times is) used as the basis for assessments. Now we accept, that some people ‘out there’ believe everything that media and social media publishes about individuals. So what happens, if one of those people just happens to be your boss or possible future boss and they just happen to believe some spurious accusation levelled at you. Conspiracy? Definitely not.

Let’s face it, even genuine (loose term in the circumstances) media hacks promote fanciful conspiracy. Back to Mr Heydon. The media, in their pathetic attempts to blacken Mr Heydon and tie this to Prime Minister Abbott related to an event over 30-years ago where Mr Heydon sat on a committee of seven who awarded PM Abbott his Rhodes Scholarship, was a classic. The inference was: 

30+ years ago a man sat on a committee to award a scholarship to  a the recipient, so that 30+ years later the recipient would be elected PM so that he could appoint a specific selection committee to a Royal Commission to bring down Unions and the current leader of the opposition. AND, some people believed it. 

So I guess the gullible will fall for any line spun to them. The disreputable will promote lies an innuendo for political gain (or any other cause they are championing) and unless we take a stand and say ‘enough’ good people will continue convicted by Media Trial based on nothing more than a mere 'fallacious' fingerprint.