Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Accidents & Injuries

Report Accidents and Injuries

Author

journos abusing online forums


rodw

20-Jan-2009
2:06:02 PM

Actually Simom Mr Bibby did the same thing ie trying to find out name before its was released, on both Crag X and ACA site. He made a mistake thats fine, I take it as face value and will leave it at that.

Hes apologised to both Neil and Simon, as they are the people he could contact talk to directly it would seem....I wouldnt post again on here if I was him either, chockstone not a place that forgives easily. The main people who were affected was Nicks family and direct friends, but Mr bibby was not the only one harassing them etc so his apology, as it is, should be enough.

I agree re Bibby's stories, its was sloppy reporting but not totally inaccurate or malicous, main issue was simply his not identifying himself which hopefully he has learnt to do now. One of the problems of being a sport with no real governing body/spokeman (which I like), is jornos in a rush for a deadline, will try and source info from any source they can...just becuase its online dosn't mean they can't follow the normal code.

If crikey and media watch want to use it as an example of poor journalism..thats fine to highlight a problem with a lot of journalist using online media to clarify stories.. Seems he may have learnt a lesson (hopefully form this) and become a better repoter in the future.

People here have to realise this forum is public and can and will be used by others for quotes. I locked the same style of thread on Cragx as soon as it appeared because this type of thing happens..just keep it in mind, when ranting about crap that it can be misquoted..taken the wrong way and used outside of chockstone very easily.


HM33

20-Jan-2009
2:13:41 PM

personally I am far more annoyed at the Telegraph article mentioned though. It was incorrect and inflamitory and for some reason they felt it necessary to put climbers names down (not the correct ones mind you) as the FA of BBB which they claimed was the route the bolt failed on.

They have also tried to inflame a shown down between climbers and NP's


nmonteith

20-Jan-2009
2:18:30 PM

agreed Rod. I also locked the accident topic for a few days whilst the facts made themselves clearer.


gremlin

20-Jan-2009
2:24:26 PM

I got an email and later a phone call from Paul Bibby earlier this morning (regarding the ACA site), and he does seem genuinely concerned about offended the climbing community and the uproar he has caused within it.

Personally i agree with HotGemini, it does seem like backpedaling to me.

However, people do make mistakes (deliberately or unintentionally) and i am sure he has learned a rather valuable lesson. My greatest fear is that he would loose his job or something like that, which is something i wouldn't want to happen to the guy.

One thing Paul mentioned was doing something in the media to show that we are not all a bunch of reckless adrenaline junkies. I liked the idea and told him to get in touch with Neil, as i couldn't think of anyone else so involved with the climbing community on such a wide scale. (i prefer to just hang around the edges and do my own thing in an attempt to avoid the politics and bullshit that goes on at times).

Duncan

20-Jan-2009
2:32:29 PM

From the SMH code of conduct:

>FAIRNESS
>Staff will use fair, honest and responsible means to obtain material. They will identify >themselves and the newspaper before obtaining interviews or images.

Fairly unambiguous really.

I also find it pretty patronising for Neil to say that the reason we reacted badly to this was a general dislike for mainstream media. I've been an SMH reader for close to twenty years, and I would react exactly the same way if, for the sake of argument, the Huffington Post did the same thing. It's simple enough to say "I'm from the SMH. Can anyone help me?" Maybe he is a nice guy who made a genuine mistake, but it certainly looks like an underhanded way of getting a scoop.


nmonteith

20-Jan-2009
2:35:54 PM

He was genuinely surprised when i told him how many climbers would have been out climbing in the Bluies that weekend (several hundred) and that there is a large 'community' of climbers living in the Mountains who climb almost every day. I wanted to let him know that the media image of the adrenaline charged young climber taking reckless risks is mere fiction on the most part. Most climbers are happy to climb well within their limits, using excellent safety equipment and on well established routes near civilization.


nmonteith

20-Jan-2009
2:41:05 PM

On 20/01/2009 Duncan wrote:
>>FAIRNESS
>>Staff will use fair, honest and responsible means to obtain material.
>They will identify >themselves and the newspaper before obtaining interviews
>or images.
>
>Fairly unambiguous really.

It's still grey in my opinion.. He was attempting to locate someone to interview. He was not conducting an interview on the forum. I think that is the confusion here. He was honestly trying to hunt down someone with the knowledge - once he found that person he would have conducted the interview 'off-line' in private and fully disclosed where he was from. That's my take on the situation. He wanted a lot more than just a name - he wanted the full story, but sadly got shot down in flames so had to resort to info obtained from the police and other forum posts.


rodw

20-Jan-2009
2:45:07 PM

On 20/01/2009 Duncan wrote:
>. I've been an SMH reader for close to twenty years,

Your profile says your 26.....Im impressed reading SMH at 6.....the paper would have been bigger than you :)

Onsight

20-Jan-2009
2:51:06 PM

On 20/01/2009 nmonteith wrote:
>It's still grey in my opinion.. He was attempting to locate someone to
>interview. He was not conducting an interview on the forum. I think that
>is the confusion here. He was honestly trying to hunt down someone with
>the knowledge - once he found that person he would have conducted the interview
>'off-line' in private and fully disclosed where he was from. That's my
>take on the situation. He wanted a lot more than just a name - he wanted
>the full story, but sadly got shot down in flames so had to resort to info
>obtained from the police and other forum posts.

That's my take on it too.


gremlin

20-Jan-2009
2:55:40 PM

On 20/01/2009 Onsight wrote:
>On 20/01/2009 nmonteith wrote:
>>It's still grey in my opinion.. He was attempting to locate someone to
>>interview. He was not conducting an interview on the forum. I think that
>>is the confusion here. He was honestly trying to hunt down someone with
>>the knowledge - once he found that person he would have conducted the
>interview
>>'off-line' in private and fully disclosed where he was from. That's my
>>take on the situation. He wanted a lot more than just a name - he wanted
>>the full story, but sadly got shot down in flames so had to resort to
>info
>>obtained from the police and other forum posts.
>
>That's my take on it too.

sorry i don't... he left no contact details in his post on our site and marked his account as anonymous. I had to resort to invading his privacy by manually looking through the database in order to retrieve his details. By default, our website does not have this option checked, it requires the user to mark a checkbox...

Duncan

20-Jan-2009
2:58:05 PM

If he was looking for someone to interview he would have said "I'm a reporter, looking for someone to interview". He asked for the name of the climber.

EDIT: the exact wording:

>G'day,
>Does anyone know the guy from the Bunny Bucket accident?

simey

20-Jan-2009
3:03:41 PM

Personally I am amazed that people are so angry with how the mainstream media reported this incident. Who genuinely turns to the mainstream media for indepth analysis of adventure sports and associated accidents? I actually thought that the Daily Telegraph article did a pretty reasonable job given the limited info available (their topo of Bunny Bucket Buttress was better than you would see in most guidebooks).

What is more surprising is that incident report on the Australian Accident Register was incorrect. It wasn't until Simon Carter reported the situation on his website that we finally understood the nitty-gritty of what went wrong.

Even the Chockstone forums harping on about incorrect bolts being used seemed to be focused in the wrong direction. The reality is that the bolts in question wouldn't have failed if they had been placed correctly. The circumstances leading to this accident could have happened if someone had gone about placing glue-ins incorrectly.

Thanks to Neil and Simon for clearing up a lot of the drivel I have had to read on Chockstone regarding this accident.

hotgemini

20-Jan-2009
3:24:50 PM

The very fact that you're having to hunt for ambiguities in their code of conduct to excuse his actions, in my opinion, is enough to damn him.

If I was engaged in an activity where it was deemed necessary to impose specificly outlined standards for my behaviour and I came across some sort of ambiguity, then I'd suggest erring towards a lower standard of behaviour because it favours your purpose is NOT the mark of a good man. As for claims that had he been able to contact someone to give a more full account then he wouldn't have done a hatchet job picking sound-bites out of the forum, well in that case its holding the entire community to blackmail. "Either tell me everything about your very recently dead friend/family member or I'll slander your entire community with any misquote I care to dredge up".

So here's a good first step if Mr. Bibby wants to mend bridges, a specific statement on SMH/Fairfax website clarifying any ambiguity around the standard of behaviour expected of reporters. It won't happen though, because in the end, this is just a PR exercise by Mr. Bibby.

Here, I'll even draft the changes...

"l. They will actively seek to identify themselves and the newspaper at all times - including but not limited to - before seeking comment, obtaining interviews or images.

So what is it going to be, action or just talk?

-Adam.


gremlin

20-Jan-2009
3:25:10 PM

I agree with Duncan, i wouldn't have cared so much if he had just worded his posts better and simply explained his motives a little clearer.


BigMike

20-Jan-2009
3:39:08 PM

On 20/01/2009 rodw wrote:
> The main
>people who were affected was Nicks family and direct friends, but Mr bibby
>was not the only one harassing them etc so his apology, as it is, should
>be enough.
>

Rod, are you sure that Paul Bibby harassed Nick's family and direct friends?


gremlin

20-Jan-2009
3:42:33 PM

Jeez Adam, all i can hear is wah wah wah wah wah Matt Damon, mer mer mer mer mer.... :P

Calm down, what do you expect, the poor guy to walk naked up the main street of Katoomba, while we all whip him with old dirt impregnated static ropes?

Knots in yer g-string can't be too good for your private bits...

hotgemini

20-Jan-2009
3:52:18 PM

He's put word out there that it was a misunderstanding and he wants forgiveness, if this is the case then surely a good first step would be removing whatever ambiguity in their CoC (which reminds me of something actually) allowed it to develop in the first place.

My hunch is that their just backpedalling and are happy to try to save face so long as it doesn't actually require any tangible action on their part.

As for walking naked through Katoomba, thats just crazy talk, I was thinking the glen and shipley upper.

-Adam.

rod

20-Jan-2009
6:11:08 PM

On 20/01/2009 BigMike wrote:
>Rod, are you sure that Paul Bibby harassed Nick's family and direct friends?

Poor form BM, I'll never get bored by the necessary disclaimer...I demand an edit to that post.


rodw

20-Jan-2009
8:30:21 PM

Sorry badly worded Bigmike...I meant to say journo's in general, like those that were outside the morge when the famliy visited etc...normal Jorno behaviour really, but that dosnt make it right.......wasnt meant to infer/say Mr Bibby was doing it....my bad.

Mr Bibby's main crime was using the forum(s) without declaring intentions and who he was etc...I think that message has got to him so I think the matter is settled, and really thats all Im commenting on as a fellow forum hoster I was concerned.


MisterGribble

20-Jan-2009
8:52:04 PM

As the good Dr Gonzo once observed

"Let the cheap dogs eat"

Good name for a route that!

There are 104 messages in this topic.