Will someone please think of the children?

Just to follow up on revelation yesterday about Neil Mitchell, he was seen on 7 News and Today Tonight pumping his own tyres and then Neil “Helen Lovejoy” Mitchell wrote in the Heraldv Sun asking us to “Will someone please think of the children?” It was enough to make me write to Mr Mitchell (or is that Lovejoy). Here is the letter:

—————————————————

From: Phillip Malone [mailto:mollyfud@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 30 August 2007 10:36 AM
To: nmitchell@3aw.com.au
Cc: mollyfud@gmail.com; sportstoady@3aw.com.au; dhoward@seven.com.au; jsmith@3aw.com.au; slbradford@3aw.com.au
Subject: Main game is our kids and the Drug story Debate.

Hi Neil,
Long time listener first time writer. I can’t how you are reporting this issue especially with the conflicting arguments you are making in the article you wrote in the Herald Sun. In it you argue the Kids are important that because of the AFL players taking drugs that kids are talking about taking drugs. You then argue for the naming of players and public punishment. Interestingly (from my reading anyway) no were in the article do you mention that one of the priorities should be helping the players (some would argue in a lot of cases kids themselves).
You also interestingly use this line:
“Sadly, at the moment some of them are endorsing illegal, insidious and potentially fatal products that are cooked up in some crook’s drug lab.”
Wow! Such power in those words yet, so inaccurate! Unless I missed it, I have never seen a player on an ad promoting drugs. They don’t seem to be the ones that are bringing up the issue at press conferences, to me that seems to be the media! In fact if your issue (as you state) is to protect the kids from hiding out about drugs and the AFL players use of them, I don’t see how naming and shaming players is going to solve that argument. In fact perhaps better and fairer reporting by the media would be a better remedy to keeping the kids safe from the message that AFL players are taking drugs.
Also while I am writing to you I want to touch on your strong defence of Channel 7 and ask why? You do mention that they have done the wrong thing yet let them off with a “little scamps” type rub of the head, saying they should do better! Why would you do this? Then I hear that you are on 7’s Sunrise program flaring up the debate (at a time I am sure kids are around the TV while getting ready for school). Then last night I see you on the News and Today Tonight (channel 7’s alleged “Current Affairs” show (the quotes on Current Affairs are there for a good reason)) . A little search of the 3aw site shows, shock horror that you have a commercial arrangement with channel 7! Now in all the clips on the 3AW website and on the 7 news and TT no mention is made that you are a paid employee of Channel 7. Don’t you think this is important information when defending to the hilt there telling of the story? 
Now I am not trying to say that this is the main reason that you are making the argument that you are any more then I really believe you think the main problem is the kids finding out (The kids argument makes you sound a little like Helen Lovejoy from the Simpsons). I put your main motivation down to the almighty ratings!
Now on other matters. I am interested that your having a go at the AFL (including Andrew Demetriou) and the AFLPA for being the “arbiter of journalistic standards” yet your not having a go at chief Commissioner Christine Nixon, Premier John Brumby, Eddie McGuire just to name a few that agree with the AFL’s point of view on the deplorable nature of Sevens report. You say that it brought new evidence to light but apart for naming the club, it didn’t. The AFL have published the number of players testing positive to drugs so this is not new information and would have been published (except for the club which if you agree (as you have stated) that you don’t want the players named, you must agree that naming the club is also wrong) in the fullness of time anyway.
Also back to your playing of a clip with Andrew Demetriou that also noticed was played in the puff piece on Today Tonight, you failed to set up correctly that Andrews beef was as much for Dylan Howard’s lying by in an interview with Tim Watson on Seven that went Live to the Ground and a number of states (and that was blocked out in the delayed coverage in Victoria from what I could tell) that the AFL supported 7’s running of the story. This is a huge omission and changes the whole context of the story. I bet if someone did that to you, you would go right off!
Also laughed when they compared the handling of Ben Cousins to Wendle Sailor and saying that the ARU is handling drugs tougher then the AFL. I hope someone as educated as your good self would know better then believe this. I am sure when you discussed this with the TT people you would have pointed out that if Ben Cousins was caught in the same situation that Sailor was, he would have been given the same punishment as the AFL also signs up the WADA drug code to which Sailor fell guilty too! I also would have thought you would have pointed out that if sailor was doing what the players where doing that where reported on last Friday that he wouldn’t even been tested let alone given the support of his Club, Union (AFLPA) and competition that he is in to recover and beat this terrible problem that conflicts our community.
So in conclusion, if you are truly worried about the kids and the glorification of drugs amongst AFL footballers perhaps you can take advice from another man that has had a checked past in the last few years but did make a great point when he sang “Start by looking at the man in the mirror, ask him to change his ways” as it is the media that is glorifying drugs not the players!
Thanks for you time.
Phillip Molly Malonehttp://afl.mollyzine.com

=========

Is this the Reason why Neil Mitchell is taking the stance he is?

 I had a little thought listening to Neil Mitchell talk about the Drug issue again and why he is being so bloody minded on the issue. Was it just ratings, trying to read his audience or was there something else that made Neil backup channel 7 the way he did. And then I found this amongst the Commercial Aggreements of one Neil Mitchell:

NEIL MITCHELL

….

Date of the agreement: 29-01-07
Parties to the agreement: Neil Mitchell & Channel 7
Presenters obligations: Weekly appearances on the Sunrise program
Party providing the benefit: Channel 7 Consideration: More than $10,000 but not more than $100,000 per annum

3AW Presenters’ Commercial Agreements - MyTalk.com.au

Well, well, well. Is anyone suprised? Not me. To quote another 3aw presenter: “Shame Shame Shame”. Come clean Neil to the this as not many of your audience would read the site and see your links.

And the absolute snow job he did on Andrew Demetriou  this morning playing a little clip of a longer segment and not giving the full story. He had it as the AFL whacking Dylan Howard because he did the story. Now the AFL have had a go at Dylan over the story but they have whacked him for Claiming that Andrew supported the story going to air and the fact that he refuses to apologies because of this lie!

Your thoughts?

Molly

MMM - Round 21 - AFL Drugs story and Channel 7 and Dylan Howard

Hi Guys,

Don’t forget you can leave audio comments below.

On this weeks Show I look at:

The S#$T hit the fan on Friday night when Seven published stolen medical records on their Friday News even after the courts had put an injunction on the report going to air. Dylan Howard (the reporter involved) has said that “the story isn’t the Story” but I am here to tell you that you are wrong. Here are my thoughts and opinion.

Subscribe to Molly?s Monday Machinations by Email by clicking here

If you want to leave me an audio comment , you can now go to the comments section below or email me your mp3 file to mollyfud@gmail.com.

Don’t forget to vote for this Podcast on Podcast Alley (see top left of this page).
Lastly if you are interested in Sponsoring the show contact me and we can organize it.

Molly

No Honor amongst thieves! So the saying goes

The story about the story (sorry Dylan Howard, but as much as you want to say it isn’t, the story is the Story) continues with news today that Seven has been raided and documents seized:

Police have raided the Seven Network’s Docklands office as part of an investigation into the alleged theft of medical records relating to two AFL players. Victoria Police confirmed they had seized a number of documents under warrant, with Seven co-operating with the investigation.

Seven raided over alleged records theft - Real Footy - Breaking News

What I didn’t see in this report was that they have handed over details of the women that brought the documents to them. Howard is on record as saying that they didn’t give the women any guarantees that they would keep her name secret just that they wouldn’t use it in the story.

This (along with the $3,000 price they paid) goes to show in my opinion that they knew that there was something wrong with these documents and that they should cover their own ass and that they didn’t want to put everything on the line for the story. Surely they normally would protect their source. Not on this issue. Smells bad to me.

Molly

IceRocket tags: AFL, Aussie Rules, Football, Footy, Australian, dhoward@seven.com.au, Dylan Howard, 7 news, seven, Channel 7,  Drugs, Stolen Documents, report, addicted

Technorati tags: AFL, Aussie Rules, Football, Footy, Australian, dhoward@seven.com.au, Dylan Howard, 7 news, seven, Channel 7, , Drugs, Stolen Documents, report, addicted

Gutter Journalism!

 All heck has broken loose and new Drug claims have surfaced stemming for documents allegedly found in a gutter outside of a Ivanhoe rehab clinic:

THE AFL has been rocked by allegations of widespread drug use at a top Melbourne club. Several players at the club have been linked to the scandal, the latest to undermine the AFL’s controversial drugs policy.

New footy scandal rocks AFL and a top Melbourne club | Herald Sun

Further reporting of the details of this issue have been rightly been suppressed as it seems that the way they have come to light is definitely in question. The article reports:

A court injunction taken out last night by a doctor named in the report prevented further publication of the scandal.

The Herald Sun was seeking to have the suppression lifted.

The injunction read in part: “His Honour Hargraves orders . . . Channel 7 is restrained from publishing any of the names or clubs or any detail relating to medical treatment of players or other information disclosed by them.”

The AFL added: “Any media agency who intends to reproduce or republish any information to which the orders apply run the risk of being in contempt of court in doing so.”

The whole thing Allegedly started two weeks ago when a women allegedly found medical documents in the gutter outside the clinic. She then allegedly tried to take the documents back to the clinic but allegedly it was locked. She then in the last two weeks wrestled with what to do, and then after allegedly talking to her alleged GP who allegedly told her it was for the alleged interest of the alleged public that she allegedly made the alleged documents.

So what does she do? Take it to channel 7 and ask for money for her story and the documents. 7 of course paid around about the figure of $3,000 dollars (as confirmed by Dillon Howard on 3AW on Saturday) which sickens me as much not just that they paid for these documents  but they paid so little. I will be interested to know the legal stand they would be in if it comes out that the documents are stolen as it seems they probably where (allegedly).

So as of now, all reports of this should not mention the team and players. Thursday there will be a hearing and until then there is an injunction on anything being said about it. 

My belief is that this will never come out that the courts will order that this is never reported due to the nature of the documents. I think it puts in great doubt the current drugs policy. The players can hardly trust it with all the problems that have had.

Molly

MMM - Round 20 - Johnson bump on Bell, Eddy and Rex and Hawks fines

Hi Guys,

Don’t forget you can leave audio comments below.

On this weeks Show I look at:

• The Johnson on Bell bump - See the video here
• Eddy V Rex Hunt - Dizzy Stuff folkes - Link to the Saturday Pre-game
• Campbell Brown Fined for Lying to Tribunal and then saying he did
• Hawks taking video of game - illegally
• Lloyd’s Goal:

Subscribe to Molly?s Monday Machinations by Email by clicking here

If you want to leave me an audio comment , you can now go to the comments section below or email me your mp3 file to mollyfud@gmail.com.

Don’t forget to vote for this Podcast on Podcast Alley (see top left of this page).
Lastly if you are interested in Sponsoring the show contact me and we can organize it.

Molly

Video - Ben Johnson’s bump on Daniel Bell

The story of this week is that Collingwood’s Ben Johnson is facing 6 weeks (7 if he unsuccessfully challenges the decision) penalty for the bump he laid on Daniel Bell of Melbourne. Here it is:

Molly

Video - Footy Classified - Beat the Press with CEOs

A very interesting segment from Footy Classified (Channel 9) from 6/08/2007. This segment involved three club CEO’s and Hutchy, Caro and Robo as the Jornos:

Molly

MMM - Round 17 and 18 - AFL Premiership 2007 review and Aka’s comments on Drugs

Hi Guys,

Don’t forget you can leave audio comments below.

On this weeks Show I look at:

• Review of the new AFL Premiership 2007 game for the PlayStation 2
• Aka’s comments about a player taking EPO and Channel 7 naming that players as Michael Braun

Subscribe to Molly?s Monday Machinations by Email by clicking here

If you want to leave me an audio comment , you can now go to the comments section below or email me your mp3 file to mollyfud@gmail.com.

Don’t forget to vote for this Podcast on Podcast Alley (see top left of this page).
Lastly if you are interested in Sponsoring the show contact me and we can organize it.

Molly

What do Mark Robinson and Hutchy think about the coaching Merry-go-round?

Have a look!

What do you think? Comment below!

Molly