|
|
Post by x on Jan 19, 2007 1:04:15 GMT -5
Alright. Everyone else is talking about this, so I'm going to weigh in. I'm going to say up front that I know I'm going to get criticized for this. If you're a sensitive soul, stop reading now.
While I do agree that this was a stupid stunt that should never have happened, I absolutely do not agree that the blame rests solely or even majorly with the radio station. I'm sick and tired of society blaming someone or a group of someones for encouraging another to do something that's clearly stupid. The ultimate responsibility rests with the person who is being asked to do the stunt. If someone tells you to jump off a bridge, do you do it? Of course not. You're intelligent enough to know that such a thing is dangerous and stupid. The same thing applies here.
Was it in bad taste? Sure. Should they have done it? No. However people need to take responsibility for themselves. This woman didn't exercise proper care in taking care of herself and paid the price for that. I think the firing of anyone who was actually responsible for putting the stunt on is justifiable from a moral point of view, but I fail to see how anyone could justify the criminal action that's being bandied about. What's next? If I pour gasoline over myself and light a match, will I be able to sue the gas station and the match manufacturer? Don't laugh folks. That's the next step.
|
|
|
|
Post by dolt on Jan 19, 2007 8:17:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stitch on Jan 20, 2007 7:18:33 GMT -5
You're not critisized for your opinion, CA   I had previously heard the audio on it and of course the DJ's did not seem concerned at all at first. But I think one of the guy DJs WAS concerned after seeing the lady in the studio. He asked if she needed to lie down.. He was concerned about her. The other guy and the girl DJ were not in the least concerned. Of course, I don't think they believed the girl could die from water, but two of the DJ's were blahzee about the situation and tried to downplay that the girl wasn't feeling well, by taking the focus off how she felt and putting it on her enlarged tummy etc. To those two, they are just doing a show and they played it as entertainment...not caring about the person at all. Alot of people wouldn't think that water can kill you. I think the station was negligent in NOT checking the dangers of this contest; however, I can understand why they didn't feel that water would kill anyone and therefore, probably did not bother to check. I can see that part of it as a forgiveable oversight. BUT a nurse did call in and tell them that this was dangerous and they shouldn't do it.. FOR THIS REASON ALONE, the station should have heeded the woman's call (even if they did not believe she was a nurse). At that point the person who received the call at the radio station should have informed management. Management (Program Director, etc.) should have made an IMMEDIATE call to a hospital emergency room, talked to a doctor and stopped the contest or changed the contest before it took place that day... Even if the contest was just about to start! Because this was not done, the radio station should be LIABLE for their actions.... Having a DJ up on personal murder charges? No. Firing the lot of DJ's and getting rid of that particular morning show? Yes. A person died, keeping the show (and the DJ's) would be incredibly insensitive. (Although, I think it would be ok to rehire the one DJ who was more sensitive to Jennifer's condition after some time passed. (Unless he was someone in management.) I do believe that he was truly afraid for her. In other words, it seemed like he did not see her as a piece of meat that he had to entertain. He saw her as a person. On TV, they played an exerpt of tape where the girl was talking about having a headache and she was supposed to have felt better after throwing up. The DJ asked her if the "Intern" had told her that and she said, "Yes". Does anyone know, was that an intern at a radio station or was that a medical intern from a hospital, who may have been overseeing the contest? |
|
|
|
Post by dolt on Jan 20, 2007 16:51:38 GMT -5
There will be shared liability. It is standard practice to attach a percentage of liability in court actions. Even crossing the street with the light in the crosswalk, a pedestrian will bear some responsibility for the motorist that hit him. Broadcast media is a powerful medium that reaches many people. If the call goes out for idiots, they will come. Because they did doesn't absolve the station from responsibility. If I went to a group home for the severely mentally challenged and offered chances to win something for doing dangerous tasks, it would be wrong. The wii promotion is a less extreme example. A quick google search would have pointed out it's inadvisability. The woman could have also done the same. Stitch I do not know if it was an intern with medical associations. I am going to go out on a limb and say no without researching it. Also I am going to continue my high sodium diet. In case someone hoodwinks me into consuming ungodly amounts of dihydrous oxygen. |
|
|
|
Post by stitch on Jan 20, 2007 18:04:24 GMT -5
I agree with you, Dolt. I think there should be shared liablity and I don't think, if the family sues, they will win, because Jennifer asked to drink more water and knew she was sick and because she put herself in danger in the 1st place. Here's the thing though. Radio stations, reality shows and talk shows need to be more responsible for their content. With a reality tv show, contestants HAVE to sign their life away. They HAVE to sign a statement saying that anything said about them is fine and anything that happens to them is ok.. EVEN DEATH. There are a few more things that HAVE to be done for a person to go on reality tv, but I'm don't want to write that novel, yet .  In radio, the listener and the station doesn't take things that seriously. They need to... Often times the listener may think that the radio station cares about people, so they have surely taken every safety precaution for the listener.... Even if the contest is eating bugs, etc. You guys, even wrestling in Jello can be a serious hazzard if a person jumps in and breaks their neck! I think eating contests cause alot of damage and eventually will cause a death. Better to be safe than sorry. It's easy to come up with better contests... Dolt wrote: Also I am going to continue my high sodium diet. In case someone hoodwinks me into consuming ungodly amounts of dihydrous oxygen. Stitch says: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA |
|
|
|
Post by x on Jan 20, 2007 23:38:22 GMT -5
If you take advantage of a mentally challenged person, that's an entirely different case. They don't have the capacity to make rational decisions and that has to be taken into account. That doesn't apply here.
The law is really weird though. Here's an example. As I understand it, if you come upon someone who requires emergency first aid (such as CPR for a heart attack), depending on your background you may or may not have liability if you mess up. If you are certified in CPR training and you botch it, you're liable for the death. If you're NOT certified, you're off the hook even if you totally screw it up. This is obviously to try to encourage lay people to help if possible, but it's a really bizarre double standard.
Stitch: You might want to check out dhmo.org
|
|
|
|
Post by dolt on Jan 22, 2007 18:17:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by henry on Jan 22, 2007 20:00:30 GMT -5
But would you consider us radio people, professionals? lol!
Seriously, I think "The End" is going to have to flip formats, if not rebrand it's whole image. At this point I don't worry about any FCC action, but if I were an advertiser, I would've pulled my account. They may actually have a really good book after this, but either way when the money's gone, it's time for change.
|
|
|
|
Post by x on Jan 22, 2007 21:06:32 GMT -5
Henry, I was thinking the exact same thing earlier today. I think the image of the station is in a lot of trouble regardless of the existence or lack thereof of liability. Firing everyone involved is a first step, but I think they'll probably have to re-brand or flip completely.
|
|
|
|
Post by stitch on Jan 23, 2007 2:47:40 GMT -5
Great site, CA! I thought Dolt was funny in the way he expressed his thoughts on a very serious issue.. I also think they will have to flip formats and call letters. Even before anyone filed a suit, I thought they would have to make a more drastic change at the station. Heck..if they make changes based on business deals and let everyone go, like radio does somewhere in the country everyday, they would do it for sure with the serious injury or death of a listener. It's a sad issue for everyone involved in that station. Jennifer's family, the people employed at the station, the listeners, who love to hear it daily, the advertisers, the owners--everyone.  |
|
