I doubt many people are familiar with the movie Scott Pilgrim Versus The World. Dorky guy who likes video games meets a suitable girl (vaguely goth, likes comic books and video games), but to win her, he must defeat each of her formidable seven ex boyfriends. It is like a series of challenges in a video game, each leading up to the Boss Fight at the end.
Or I guess so. I don’t really have the patience for video games.
The announcement yesterday of the verdict in the Bruce Lehrmann defamation case against Channel Ten reminded me of the Scott Pilgrim movie, except that the main character is Channel Seven (a far less sympathetic character than Scott Pilgrim), and that it is using various other actors of dubious integrity as proxies in its fight against the other television networks.
This of course started with the defamation action which now disgraced war hero Ben Roberts-Smith VC fought against Channel Nine and its various associated outlets, including the several former Fairfax newspapers, for having the temerity of accusing him of war crimes in Afghanistan.
Whilst Channel Seven was not directly involved in those proceedings, they did bankroll Roberts-Smith in his defamation action, given that he was then a senior employee of the network and well regarded by the management of the company.
Effectively, Channel Seven used Ben Roberts-Smith in a proxy war against the Nine Network, where the risks to itself mainly consisted of losing the money put upfront to fund the litigation, but where most of the possible liability and all of the potential reputation damage would be incurred by the litigant.
The Bruce Lehrmann defamation action against Channel Ten was finalised yesterday with a judgment that, on the balance of probabilities, Bruce Lehrmann had committed the rape. Whilst Channel Ten’s manner of reporting the allegation in question was not laudable, it was not defamatory.
But it was not just the alleged actions of Lehrmann and Channel Ten in question at this trial. Just before the judgement was due to be handed down, a disgruntled former Channel Seven producer raised details of circumstances relating to the year that Lehrmann had spent living rent free in a luxury apartment paid for by Channel Seven in return for his exclusive interview. Accusations of the provision of prostitutes and party drugs flew wildly.
This represents the second proxy war that Seven has been involved with in relation to its rival television networks.
Both cases do not reflect credit on Channel Seven. It shows a tendency to encourage people aligned with the network to litigate against its rivals, regardless of the collateral damage that these people may suffer from undertaking such actions.
Also, and this is what is far worse for the state of telejournalism in Australia, the Higgins – Lehrmann saga in particular shows not only the relentless way commercial networks like Seven and Ten are going to use their cheque books to pursue ratings for news stories, but the extremely partisan way that they are going to choose to report the news on such serious topics as criminal investigations. Channel Ten was Team Higgins, and Channel Seven was Team Lehrmann. Justice was served in no way whatsoever by the conduct of either network.
What this says, going forward, for potential partisan media conduct on sub judice criminal cases, is ominous for the integrity of the criminal justice system.
Lost For Words! 