You've reached our premium or archival content
To access this page, and more great content just like it, you need to become a paid subscriber.
If you already have an account, please login.
Otherwise, registration is quick and you'll have access instantly after payment.
I have also made a comment at RadioInfo's sibling publication Radio Today, https://radiotoday.com.au/dan-jones-on-marcus-pauls-sacking/ .
In the comment, I didn't agree with the premise that because the presenter's station, 2SM had little reources that it caused the presenter to present a bad-taste question. 2GB with much more resources than 2SM presented a quiz question with bad taste.
Given that a broadcaster has to keep in mind the responsibilities to not defame, discriminate or vilify, though not regulated, self-regulation of bad taste would be an inherent quality of a broadcaster.
Nevertheless, there is an INCONSISTENCY in employment policy: 2GB kept the presenter while 2SM dismissed its presenter.
Given that the presenter with an employer providing little or no resources, the presenter put his heart and soul into the program. He interviewed guests with diverse political views and had a segment with YouTube presenter Friendly Jordies.
At worst, the presenter could have been suspended for another two weeks then resume his on-air duties with a profound apology. During that two week hiatus, as news has a lifespan, the issue would have died.
In sum, the presenter at most should have been suspended then resume his on-air duties.
Thank you,
Anthony with another perspective on the issue, Belfield in the land of the Wangal and Darug Peoples of the Eora Nation.