Green Room

VIdeo: Australian DJs heartbroken over royal phone prank

posted at 9:46 am on December 10, 2012 by

One of two interviews they did this weekend with Aussie TV about the Kate Middleton phone hoax that may or may not have led to a nurse’s suicide. More than two-thirds of Australians say they’re blameless for what happened, but their show’s been canceled, the police are pondering an investigation, and the two of them are allegedly “receiving medical assistance amid growing fears for their ‘physical and emotional wellbeing’.” Their remorse is obviously heartfelt; maybe the clip will shrink the lynch mob a bit. Or maybe not: In the Internet age, there are no tragedies, just victims and oppressors who need to be taught a lesson. What’s the lesson again here?

If you don’t have time to watch, the Daily Beast has a full transcript.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Sorry…humor by ridicule and making someone feel small is not humor. All ridicule IS injurious. It’s the same as calling an overweight person fat and then following up with “Just kidding.” The insult is still out there. It has still impacted the target.

Your viewpoint, that this type of humor is good humor (I’m assuming) seems to come from a innate need to feel superior. Just as your ad hominem attacks provide an air of superiority by tearing another down. Keep them to yourself.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 12:29 PM

I read this, and see a close-minded control freak with a less-than-good sense of humor, who suffers from arrogance and confirmation bias.

You cannot argue with what I just said in a rational manner, which I confidently predict you will now go on to prove! :)

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Example: you stupidly presume that all fat jokes are made with a passive-agressive intent, which only goes to show that your creativity is limited.

You don’t understand that your assertions are not proofs, which is why I am so confident this conversation between us will solve nothing – you are convinced you’re right and unopen to any contrary evidence, which makes you no different than a common, boring leftist in this way.

Conceivably, you could prove me wrong, but my experience says you will not!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Too bad the DJ’s couldn’t have looked into the future, they would have nixed this with a chuckle, “nah, let’s call the grocery store and ask if they have Prince Edward in a can.”

Their reaction shows the idiocy of thinking something like this is funny. I suppose I get when the DJ’s punked Sarah Palin to get a big guff-faw, but I really don’t get what was going to be so funny about this particular call.

it should be noted that there’s likely a 99% chance that woman would be alive today absent this prank call.

Something about actions have consequences, and this can’t be walked back. Too bad for all, it’s a completely unnecessary tragedy, borne from two idiots.

williampeck1958 on December 10, 2012 at 1:00 PM

it’s a completely unnecessary tragedy, borne from two idiots.

make that “borne from multiple idiots, including some lawyer(s), if I’ve understood the “vetting” properly.

williampeck1958 on December 10, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Your viewpoint, that this type of humor is good humor (I’m assuming) seems to come from a innate need to feel superior. Just as your ad hominem attacks provide an air of superiority by tearing another down.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 12:29 PM

I read this, and see a close-minded control freak with a less-than-good sense of humor, who suffers from arrogance and confirmation bias.

You cannot argue with what I just said in a rational manner, which I confidently predict you will now go on to prove!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Example: you stupidly presume that all fat jokes are made with a passive-agressive intent, which only goes to show that your creativity is limited.

You don’t understand that your assertions are not proofs, which is why I am so confident this conversation between us will solve nothing – you are convinced you’re right and unopen to any contrary evidence, which makes you no different than a common, boring leftist in this way.

Conceivably, you could prove me wrong, but my experience says you will not!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I don’t need to prove you wrong when, with every post you validate my point. Thank you.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 1:04 PM

I don’t need to prove you wrong when, with every post you validate my point. Thank you.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Mitcoh55=confirmation bias personified. Are you smart enough to even define what “confirmation bias” is? lol

You are a poor thinker, which goes right along with your poor sense of humor! :D

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

You realize you’re projecting your own faults onto others?

I asked you to make me a sandwich. How’s that coming along?

22044 on December 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Mitcoh55=confirmation bias personified. Are you smart enough to even define what “confirmation bias” is? lol

You are a poor thinker, which goes right along with your poor sense of humor!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Every. Post.

Perhaps you should look up the term “irony.” Your assertions are filled with them. “Willful blindness” would be a good one too.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM

I agree with almost everything you said, but Mr. Gutfeld doesn’t experience actual pain in his self deprecating humor. Other than that, I am a huge fan of the genre.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

You realize you’re projecting your own faults onto others?

What’s your proof that I’m guilty of that? Note that “Because I say so” doesn’t constitute proof, nor does a personal attack or any attempt to change the subject…

I asked you to make me a sandwich. How’s that coming along?

22044 on December 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Why don’t you ask me again? :)

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Every. Post.

i.e. “OK, you got me, I can’t, so I’ll just insult you to try protect myself instead!” lol

Perhaps you should look up the term “irony.” Your assertions are filled with them. “Willful blindness” would be a good one too.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 1:18 PM

I have a rule: don’t waste your time debating pompous leftists with poor senses of humor and self-awareness, or non-leftists who argue and carry on like those leftists. Guess how I’ve categorized you? Bye now! :D

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:27 PM

You realize you’re projecting your own faults onto others?

What’s your proof that I’m guilty of that? Note that “Because I say so” doesn’t constitute proof, nor does a personal attack or any attempt to change the subject…
Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Irony Alert

I have a rule: don’t waste your time debating pompous leftists with poor senses of humor and self-awareness, or non-leftists who argue and carry on like those leftists. Guess how I’ve categorized you? Bye now!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:27 PM

The myopia is strong with this one.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 1:31 PM

I saw some British pundit on TV (wish I could remember who) that said there is a password given to people interacting with the royal family so that they know that they are speaking to someone legitimate. That didn’t work.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 1:33 PM

I agree with almost everything you said, but Mr. Gutfeld doesn’t experience actual pain in his self deprecating humor. Other than that, I am a huge fan of the genre.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

We have a fundamental agreement about tolerance and understanding whether it’s spoken or not, which is why we wouldn’t argue with the other when we disagree – I wish everyone else were like us!

About Greg: that he doesn’t experience pain in his self-deprecating humor is a commendable trait many others could learn from. Some people, like Mitoch55, come off as the arrogant, poor-humored type who believe it would be better for Greg if he didn’t participate in that kind of humor. Who would rather hang out with people like them than people like Greg? Not sane, mature ones, I can authoritatively say! :)

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM

@segasagez:
@allahpundit:

I would exonerate Jones simply because I don’t think free speech here in America should be limited to serve an abstract, highly debatable foreign policy objective. I would nonetheless sympathize strongly with any innocent bystander who was hurt by jihadists enraged by something Jones did, and I would assign Jones partial moral but not legal responsibility for it.

But what overriding objective is served by preserving an unfettered right to prank? Why shouldn’t injury incurred as the result of a prank gone awry be legally compensable?

Seth Halpern on December 10, 2012 at 1:53 PM

…Some people, like Mitoch55, come off as the arrogant, poor-humored type who believe it would be better for Greg if he didn’t participate in that kind of humor. Who would rather hang out with people like them than people like Greg? Not sane, mature ones, I can authoritatively say!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Every. Post.

Authoritatively…I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Everyone is free to disagree with me. Ain’t that America? I like Greg Gutfeld to take up the Breitbart banner. I don’t know if he can completely fill his shoes (so to speak) but he has the right idea.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 1:57 PM

I blame the monarchy. England should stop pretending that any member of its government has been appointed by God. This incident shows that too many people there (and here) are far too emotionally invested in a bunch of wealthy layabouts for their own good.

EricW on December 10, 2012 at 12:05 PM

That idea essentially died with Charles the First .

EnglishRogue on December 10, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 1:55 PM

I think when he italicizes something and puts a smiley face behind it, you are suppose to recognize sarcasm and nuance. I think you just got what we called “Bishop” around here.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:00 PM

I think when he italicizes something and puts a smiley face behind it, you are suppose to recognize sarcasm and nuance. I think you just got what we called “Bishop” around here.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:00 PM

Not buying it. He can put all the smiley faces he wants on the posts. Not when you read the rest of the post, in context.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Everyone is free to disagree with me. Ain’t that America?

It is supposed to be!

I like Greg Gutfeld to take up the Breitbart banner. I don’t know if he can completely fill his shoes (so to speak) but he has the right idea.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 1:57 PM

I agree, but, as much as I like Greg, I don’t believe he could fill the role very well, unfortunately.

I think when he italicizes something and puts a smiley face behind it, you are suppose to recognize sarcasm and nuance. I think you just got what we called “Bishop” around here.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:00 PM

I am a sarcastic person, but as one who is not passive-aggressive, I am not snide, mean, nor excessively cryptic in my humor.

The problem people like Mitoch55 have with people like me is that they are suspicious of our sincerity to the point of ridiculousness – they don’t stop to question whether or not their observations and inferences about us are correct, even when their errors are pointed out to them!

Because of my sense of humor, I make fun of them for this, but because of their lack of a good sense of humor, they mistake my mockery as arrogance, no ifs, ands, or buts about it! Until people like Mitoch55 humble themselves by acknowledging that perhaps they’ve been wrong, I see the difference between us as being insurmountable.

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Your arguments are more effective when they don’t make personal attacks. You have an interesting point of view, but it fails to persuade when you attack the other folks, falsely, of being humorless, leftist, etc. I think you know that, since you basically said as much over the weekend.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Sorry, I’ve read the comments and I’m not with you on this issue. People have to do a lot worse than this for me to subscribe evil intentions to their actions. Living well is the best revenge, if revenge is needed.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:31 PM

This admittedly raises the question if it should be okay to prank/punk a jihadist.

Seth Halpern on December 10, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Seth Halpern on December 10, 2012 at 2:32 PM

I guess we will know based on the conviction rate of most, if not all, our homegrown jihadists. Are most arrested based on stings?

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:36 PM

The problem people like Mitoch55 have with people like me is that they are suspicious of our sincerity to the point of ridiculousness – they don’t stop to question whether or not their observations and inferences about us are correct, even when their errors are pointed out to them!

Because of my sense of humor, I make fun of them for this, but because of their lack of a good sense of humor, they mistake my mockery as arrogance, no ifs, ands, or buts about it! Until people like Mitoch55 humble themselves by acknowledging that perhaps they’ve been wrong, I see the difference between us as being insurmountable.

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Every. Post.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Cindy, just as I was saying!:

Me: Until people like Mitoch55 humble themselves by acknowledging that perhaps they’ve been wrong, I see the difference between us as being insurmountable.

Mitoch55, the arrogant: Not buying it. He can put all the smiley faces he wants on the posts. Not when you read the rest of the post, in context.

Yep, the self-styled genius of humor and insight Mitoch55 gets that there is only one possible way to interpret my words, but Cindy, being easily tricked, doesn’t!

It’s a waste of time to debate people like Mitoch55 who’s minds are made up no matter what you say or do, so it’s best to either ignore them or mock them – ROFL@Mitoch55, her predisposition towards confirmation bias, and her reading comprehension skills! :D

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 2:40 PM

The beauty of the internet, I ran into this during the primaries when the Mittwitts would call names instead of promoting the virtues of their candidate. Well, that’s a bit unfair, there were a few people like that for every candidate but Gov. Romney’s were the majority. When I suggested that the tactic might be counter productive I was labelled passive aggressive. I consider it a compliment. Nothing is more amusing than pop-psychology dished out on a blog.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Your arguments are more effective when they don’t make personal attacks. You have an interesting point of view, but it fails to persuade when you attack the other folks, falsely, of being humorless, leftist, etc. I think you know that, since you basically said as much over the weekend.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 2:31 PM

I say that you are wrong to say that I am attacking others, “falsely”, and also that by criticizing me like this shows that you yourself are an inadvertent hypocrite.

You disagree with me about this, of course, but you don’t make your argument based on facts – you make a simple and basic, “I’m right about you, and you’re wrong”, and leave it at that, which means you are not an interesting person to debate.

Think about this: what factual proof, not based upon your personal opinions only, leads people like you and Mitoch55 to believe that you understand me better than someone like Cindy does?

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Cindy, just as I was saying!:

Me: Until people like Mitoch55 humble themselves by acknowledging that perhaps they’ve been wrong, I see the difference between us as being insurmountable.

Mitoch55, the arrogant: Not buying it. He can put all the smiley faces he wants on the posts. Not when you read the rest of the post, in context.

Yep, the self-styled genius of humor and insight Mitoch55 gets that there is only one possible way to interpret my words, but Cindy, being easily tricked, doesn’t!

It’s a waste of time to debate people like Mitoch55 who’s minds are made up no matter what you say or do, so it’s best to either ignore them or mock them – ROFL@Mitoch55, her predisposition towards confirmation bias, and her reading comprehension skills!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Nice bit of cut and pasting from completely separate posts from different people. Now we can add dishonesty to your traits.

Every. Post.

Mitoch55 on December 10, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Hey, I made a Krugman joke in a comment to you the other day and you didn’t laugh. Did you not get the joke, or did you just think it wasn’t funny? If you didn’t think it was funny, then doesn’t that make you a humorless leftist female feminist? I thought it was funny, but then I never outgrew bathroom humor.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Anti-control, by “falsely”, I’m referring to your calling people “humorless” if they didn’t find this particular prank funny. I have been on the giving and receiving end of countless pranks with people I know: co-workers, bosses, roommates, family, teammates. I just don’t see the point of calling up someone you’ve never even heard of at their workplace and pestering them.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Had she killed the phone pranksters would it be their fault or hers?

What if she just killed the first person she saw after she found she’d been pranked, would that be the DJ’s fault?

There is no justification for blaming the pranksters for whatever crime she committed afterward.

Akzed on December 10, 2012 at 3:15 PM

The beauty of the internet, I ran into this during the primaries when the Mittwitts would call names instead of promoting the virtues of their candidate. Well, that’s a bit unfair, there were a few people like that for every candidate but Gov. Romney’s were the majority. When I suggested that the tactic might be counter productive I was labelled passive aggressive. I consider it a compliment. Nothing is more amusing than pop-psychology dished out on a blog.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:50 PM

I myself am a fan of pop-psychology, as long as it properly understood and applied.

Example 1: those accusing you of passive-aggressiveness did so with no concern for accuracy, which only worked to prove that they themselves were projecting their own passive-aggressiveness onto you!

Sorry, I’ve read the comments and I’m not with you on this issue. People have to do a lot worse than this for me to subscribe evil intentions to their actions. Living well is the best revenge, if revenge is needed.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Example 2: your tendency to give people the benefit of the doubt reveals your inner goodness, an admirable level maturity that people who have a tendency toward distrusting others are lacking! :)

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Akzed on December 10, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Oh, that’s a very interesting angle.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 3:24 PM

An admirable level of maturity isn’t too surprising for someone who will be sixty next year.

Cindy Munford on December 10, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Hey, I made a Krugman joke in a comment to you the other day and you didn’t laugh. Did you not get the joke, or did you just think it wasn’t funny? If you didn’t think it was funny, then doesn’t that make you a humorless leftist female feminist? I thought it was funny, but then I never outgrew bathroom humor.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Are those 2 reactions the only possible ones – just because I didn’t express laughter to you means I didn’t think your Krugman joke was funny?

Anti-control, by “falsely”, I’m referring to your calling people “humorless” if they didn’t find this particular prank funny. I have been on the giving and receiving end of countless pranks with people I know: co-workers, bosses, roommates, family, teammates. I just don’t see the point of calling up someone you’ve never even heard of at their workplace and pestering them.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Have you strongly considered yet that you have been consistently misreading and misunderstanding me?

I challenge you to demonstrate that I called anyone who didn’t enjoy the shock jocks’ prank, “humorless” – I can tell you right now that I didn’t, but please, feel free to go back and check the evidence if you want!

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 3:36 PM

You called me and and at least one other person humorless, the other day. I’m sure she doesn’t want me dragging her name back into a silly discussion.

It’s not a big deal, I’m just arguing with you because I’d rather do this than do some Christmas shopping, which I hate and would rather put off some more. But we are just going round and round, and little of it makes any sense. It’s unproductive.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 3:50 PM

The female jock’s grief, I believe. The male seems kind of a d!ck; his no-tears sobbing did not convince. Both passed ultimate responsibility up the chain of command into the ether. The interviewer was amazing.

As I’ve stated before, poor Mrs. Saldanha obviously had other things going on before she chose suicide. That the Aussie Crank-Yankers lost their show seems punishment enough.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on December 10, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Prank phone calls are about as old as the telephone itself and I have a hard time believing that someone would resort to suicide just for falling for one. The thing that is relatively new is the anonymous blog posting or newspaper comment sections. For some reason the most vile and vicious among us like to use the comment section to see just how hateful they can be in order to get a rise out of other readers and the media outlet benefits from the drama through web clicks or whatever. It’s easy for the average person to ignore it or laugh it off. But for someone that may be on the bubble emotionally to get bombarded with the kind of hateful reaction that this harmless prank caused, suicide is not that hard to fathom. Depending on the media source or subject matter of the story I can usually predict how bad the hate spewing will be in the comment section.

mike_NC9 on December 10, 2012 at 4:46 PM

You called me and and at least one other person humorless, the other day. I’m sure she doesn’t want me dragging her name back into a silly discussion.

It’s not a big deal, I’m just arguing with you because I’d rather do this than do some Christmas shopping, which I hate and would rather put off some more. But we are just going round and round, and little of it makes any sense. It’s unproductive.

juliesa on December 10, 2012 at 3:50 PM

1) I didn’t call you humorless because you didn’t find the prank funny. Do you even care? Apparently not – it seems that you’d rather hold on to that false opinion like it’s a security blanket

2) we are going around and around, but I say that’s because you and the others who have been arguing with me aren’t listening to what I’ve actually been saying, and that you have a hard time admitting that you’re wrong and imperfect. Yep, you say the same about me, and accuse me of projection. So, who’s correct here – are you interested in getting to the bottom of it? Nope, you’re not, because then you’d have to face the reality that you’ve been misinterpreting and misunderstanding what I’ve been saying!

The fact that I am not running away from the charge against me of “projection”, which I find completely baseless and thus humorous, nor getting defensive about it should be enough to tell you what the truth here is, but it’s not sinking in to your heads because you won’t let it, and that’s not my problem.

Anti-Control on December 10, 2012 at 5:40 PM

MechanicalBill:This popped up,a hour ago!:)
===========================================

I don’t understand the reply?

MechanicalBill on December 10, 2012 at 11:17 AM

MechanicalBill:

Sorry,it was in reference to your comment:

(I think it’s more likely the nurse’s boss lit into her fairly hard for letting such calls go through.)
—————————————-

I was just showing,that according to the hospital,the DJ’s were
able to bypass the higher ups.

How,I don’t know!

canopfor on December 10, 2012 at 11:17 PM

If we knew the whole story.
Three words.

Straw. Meets. Camel’ s. Back.

marybel on December 11, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Comment pages: 1 2