2GB’s Ray Hadley breached privacy rules by broadcasting man’s address, rules ACMA
Embattled broadcaster 2GB has had yet another finding against it by the media watchdog.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority has ruled that the Sydney radio station’s presenter Ray Hadley breached the codes of practice for commercial radio relating both to privacy and to how the station then handled a complaint about it.
The ruling follows comments made by Ray Hadley on his morning show in November last year after the man called police, alleging Hadley had threatened him. The man had previously had an altercation with Alan Jones at an outside broadcast.
Hadley told his listeners:
Without defending the fool mentioned above, 2GB regularly breaches the code of practice yet never suffers anything more than a slap on the wrist. Often it’s less than that – as in this instance. They keep doing it because they know they can get away with it. ACMA is a waste of oxygen.
Who are these people at 2GB?
Surely if you are on air then you are responsible? Why would a radio station hire irresponsible people?
Professionals make radio presenters, not hot air breathers? What is wrong with their recruitment policies?
(Or am I missing something?)
Dan, I totally agree with you. ACMA are toothless hypocritical tigers.
“It emerged during the investigation that Hadley had got the man’s address wrong, instead broadcasting the address of somebody with the same name.”
This is why vigilantism by the media is so wrong. Shame on Hadley.
It is about time that the general public woke up to themselves about 2GB. We have (finally) seen some sense in the social media backlash to Alan Jones’ outrageous comments. Perhaps we are now going to see something similar with Hadley. Hadley’s on air (and off air – just ask any of the 2GB staff) behaviour is as equally, if not more unacceptable than that of Jones.
ACMA are hopeless and the wrist slapping simply reinforces the views of these people that they answer to no-one.
Bring on the great leveller that is social media or at least do a google search on Ray Hadley and see why he has made news headlines over the past few months. It’s appalling.
If this bozo wants to stick his head up above the parapet with his threatening behaviour and complaints about 2GB, then he cannot expect anonymity.
If he showed up wearing a balaclava and threatening people, he’d be arrested.
Whether or not you like 2GB’s style and content, or mistakes made, it’s pretty obvious that the “out of touch” allegations about 2GB have now been put to bed. The people have spoken.
So not only did he broadcast a person’s address on air – and I assume if a person has the mental capacity to speak an address out loud they have the mental capacity to be aware this a breach of the code – he also got it wrong.
I wonder what kind of crap the poor bloke who just happens to share a name with Hadley’s enemies went through?
They did this, knowing full well that the regulator would take action. They did this knowing that the regulator’s response would be weaker than a butterfly’s biceps.
That tells you what 2GB thinks of our regulator.
That tells you how well protected Joe Everyman is from media viciousness.
And they say we don’t need a stronger regulator?
Hmmmmm, Interesting that ‘troll outing’ on social media, running to tracking them down at work, or confronting them on camera at their home or place of business is regarded as acceptable. Similarly, someone can be forced out of their job for a private, poor taste attempt at a political joke and named and shamed through out the media including a campaign against their employer until the person was forced to leave (or fired). However, a name & shame on 2GB is classed as another example of their outrageous conduct.
I don’t support any of those efforts nor 2GB, it’s just interesting to see the hypocrisy in reaction to the various scenartios.