Why Are Fairfax Trying To Destroy Schapelle Corby?

8/9/2019 Why Are Fairfax Trying To Destroy Schapelle Corby?

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/why-are-fairfax-trying-to-destroy-schapelle-corby 1/7

WHY ARE FAIRFAX TRYING TO DES TROY SCHAPELLE?

About that initiative, Mr Allard. You know the one? The one in which Fairfax

manufactured a poll and then sought to use it to undermine Schapelle Corby’s chances of coming home to hosp ital and surviving.

Shall we have a look at it? And perhaps take a peek at your track record and considersome underlying questions?

THE OLD POLL TRICKWhy did Fairfax create such a poll, at a key point in Schapelle Corby’s clemency appeal,

with humanitarians desperate for radio silence to give her the best chance? Why wouldthey manufacture that, Mr Allard?

More to the point, why would they run a story, through your pen, which seeks to suggestthat the support for her in Australia is not overwhelming? Why represent that, instead of

the true p icture, of, for examp le, the Women For Schapelle group being overwhelmingly

applauded as they campaign throughout the country with they banners and leaflets?



Wouldn’t that have been a p leasant positive story on Schapelle, of rapidly increasing

concern and expanding support?

Was t hat not the signal you wanted to send, Mr Allard? Why not? Why would Fairfaxconstruct a hostile story, rather than pick up a colourful and helpful news story that wasactually unfolding in the real world?

You see, M r Allard, the reality is that most Aust ralians are sickened by what is happening

to Schapelle. They want her home and in hospital immediately. Outside Australia, outside

the scope of the toxic influence of Fairfax and the Aust ralian media, no-on e at all wantsanything other than immediate freedom for Schapelle.

Just a couple of other things on your story, Mr Allard.

OPINION MANAGEMENT

That term, “convicted drug smuggler Schapelle Corby”, which yet again, you use in your

story. Why is that M r Allard? Of all the possible terms you could use, why is thatALWAYS used? Is it because of its dark connotations regarding Schapelle, and that it

promotes the credibility of what was a show trial? That it makes her sound guilty?

How about one of these: “ Imprisoned Australian, Schapelle Corby”? Or “mentally il l,

Schapelle Corby”. Or what about expanding on the truth M r Allard, with “ Innocent,Schapelle Corby” or “human rights abuse v ictim, Schapelle Corby”?

Why, Mr Allard do we never see anything remotely like these in Fairfax publications?

Why is it always the term with negative influence on public perception, “convicted drug

smuggler Schapelle Corby”?

THAT LITTLE FABRICATIONAnd what about that little fabrication you threw in? You know, “high grade marijuana”.High grade? Really? How could you possibly know that Mr Allard, when the court

REFUSED to test it for quality or origin, despite Schapelle begging them to? Had thisslipped your mind somehow?

Or is the truth that having called h er “convicted drug smuggler Schapelle Corby” youwanted to embellish the bag of weed a little further to make it sound like a more heinous

crime? A litt le more twist to the influence your article might have on the public, or morefrighteningly, on the Indonesians.

A HUMAN BEINGYou see, we are back there, Mr Allard. Schapelle Corby is a human being. Not just that,

but a psychotic mentally ill human b eing, who is not in a hospital being treated, but in an

overbearing overcrowded prison cell in squalid h arsh conditions. Schapelle Corby issuffering grotesquely, not only from the conditions, but in her child-like state being

unable to defend herse lf, from bul lying and worse.



She is going to stay there and almost certainly die M r Allard, unless her clemency appeal

is successful.

So why did you produce an article which might undermine her chances? Whydidn’t

youproduce one that might help her?

Can you not understand why the thriving Women For Schapelle group have a problemwith you?

A REPEAT OFFENDER

I also understand that you are a serial offender M r Allard. For your employers, Fairfax,over the years you have produced a number of stories damaging to Schapelle Corby,

haven’t you? Have you seen t he following JournOz entry from January?

TOM ALLARD EXTRACT FROM JOURNOZ

During the last coup le of weeks, two 'news stories' have been published in the Australian

media which many ethical journalist s quite rightly consider to be extremely damaging tothe profession of journalism. Many would go further, and call them a reckless or

deliberate disregard for the consequences of the constituent words on the prospects of acitizen's survival - specifically, that they apparently undermine the efforts to save amentally ill woman fro m further torment, which in itself will probably lead to death in the

short term.

Bear in mind here that the journalists and editorial staff involved must have been wellaware of the perilous s tate of the subject, Schapelle Corby. Her diagnosis by an eminentpsychiatrist, in fact no less than the former President of the Royal Australian and New

Zealand College of Psychiatrists, could hardly be more widely known, and has beenreferenced by both media organs many times.

Schapelle Corby is not just mentally ill, but in grave trouble. Dr Phillips was explicitwhen he revealed her condition:

"She is now helpless, hopeless, feels useless, she feels alienated, she feels removed from

the rest of humanity""She is in a situation where she could easily move forward to kill herself .""Schapelle has now cut herself quite severely and many times over on two occasions.""She is hanging on by a thread "

Left in her Indonesian prison call, she has continued to deteriorate since she was

assessed. Her life hangs in the balance, with her family ever more desp erate.

So in the light this hugely disturbing real life situation, let's examine the two

contributions, which were presented as news:



TOM ALLARD, S YDNEY MORNING HERALD (January 24, 2010)

This was a ridiculous story, constructed entirely on the premise that an imprisonedAustralian was looking out for a mentally-ill prisoner. Yes, indeed, THAT is apparently

the story.

Thus, as there basically was no story, the real purpose of the article must surely havebeen to deliver something other than actual news.

But what? Why create a story, including yet more public curiosity photographs of aseriously psychotic Schapelle Corby, on the basis of pretty much nothing? What was the

journalist trying to achieve?

Shall we take a look at his masterpiece, and consider the extracts which p ertain toSchapelle Corby?

Let’s forget the innuendo of linking Schapelle Corby to "lies" for now, and focus instead

on the book in question. Kathryn Bonella is a highly respected author who spent twoyears intensively researching for the recently published ’Hotel Kerobokan’. This is a

compelling expose: one which has resulted in predictable defensive propaganda from the

prison governor. One part of this operation has been to allow carefully controlled andmanaged prison access to certain sections of the Australian media, who have reported

dutifully on the highly selective scenarios they have been exposed to.

This issue, of the Australian media disseminating the propaganda of a foreign prison as

news, has been discussed by ethical journalists elsewhere, but the moot p oint with respectto the JournOz investigations is that associating Schapelle Corby with that particular

book may increase the risk to Schapelle Corby herself, who of course is totally helpless in

her current state of health, and at the mercy of everyone within that prison.

Surely it must have occurred to M r Allard, that having been fed the prop aganda, hisoutput might just be read in Indonesia. Did this scenario not even cross his mind?



A PTA is about as much use to Schapelle Corby as a back p ocket in a vest. Both himself,

and Kevin Rudd, must surely realize that Schapelle Corby is unlikely to survive anything

like long enough to benefit from it. Perhaps he should refer to the stories publishedpreviously in his own organ pertaining to the Dr Phillips report. There are other routesavailable to Kevin Rudd, such as direct diplomacy and negotiation: why didn’t hismention those? Why didn’t he report the real situat ion?

Shall we translate this to: " Don’t bother to be concerned or even protest for this woman.

She is going to stay there anyway, so there is noth ing you can do"? What a heroic

message regarding someone who is not likely to survive much longer, and whose mental

state deteriorates almost by the day.

SCRATCHING THE SURFACE

Shall we also have a quick check on Tom Allard's professional history? Shall we have a

quick look to see if there are any interesting links? Say... with the Schapelle Corby case

or key players within it?

Should we really be that surprised? Straight off the bat Google shows us a nice set of

previous reports, pertaining to one M r M ichael Keelty, Head of the AFP when Schapelle

Corby was incarcerated. And let's not beat about the bush: the same M r Keelty who isheld in contempt by many Schapelle Corby and human rights advocates.



You see, M r Keelty was involved in a number of events which are widely considered to

have contributed to Schapelle Corby ’s predicament, not least a statement in M ay 2005 inwhich slighted her defence prior to the verdict, and which has since been shown to be….

rather operationally lacking. That was an ultra-diplomatic turn of phrase I used there bythe way.

It appears that Mr Allard has not only writt en about Mr Keelty whilst reporting generalnews, but has produced a bio piece which many would say is rather flattering, even

glowing. The p iece I am looking at now even delivers another of Commissioner Keelty 's

hostile comments regarding the case, though the pen of Tom Allard.

Would you care to comment on this strange coincidence, Mr Allard?

Of course, we know that your... err, position... with respect to M r Keelty wouldn't have

influenced your story on Schapelle Corby at all. But I am sure you can provide us with agood explanation to counter all those wicked people out here who might think unpure

thoughts.

GROSS ABUSEAnd whilst discussing this less than helpful story, it would be remiss not to mention the

gross abuse of Schapelle Corby's privacy. Already paranoid to the degree that sheremoved the eyes from her soft toys because she thought they might be cameras, she wasconfronted again by gleeful press hounds exploiting her in the worst imaginable

paparazzi tradition. Is there no end to the depth of this gutter?

This is morally and ethically repugnant, of course, but let's examine som e of theinternational frameworks which exist to restrain rogue nations, as well as p redators likeFairfax:

In a formal War Scenario, the Geneva Conv ention is clear: " Article 27 says that people

protected by the Four th Convention ‘are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their

persons" and be protected from violence, threats, insults and public curiosity. A similar provision under the Third Convention protects prisoners of war against "insults and

public curiosi ty’.". And " Art. 27. Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to

respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated,

and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity.". For normal conditions, the United Nations also

publish some p rovisions in this area, and with respect to the rights of mentally ill

prisoners.

Of course, Fairfax are not alone in abusing Schapelle Corby , Channel Nine and others

also have an appalling track record for it. But tormenting a mental ly ill woman makes atruly grotesque spectacle to anyone who respects human rights.



Finally, it would app ear, T om Allard, that you are following in the footsteps of your

predecessor at SMH, Eamonn Duff. However, just out of curiosity, are you proud of yourconduct with this case? Is this what you envisaged journalism as being when you entered

the profession all those years ago?

I don’t mean to p robe, but it really is hard not wonder about these sorts of aspects when I

read disturbing material like yours.

WHY?

So, why are all your articles on Schapelle Corby always hostile to her, Mr Allard? Whydo Fairfax never publish supportive material?

I already know the answers Mr Allard, but I would like to hear them from you. You havemy email address.

Documents

Why Are Fairfax Trying To Destroy Schapelle Corby?