I hope he gets 20 years hard labour and 10 lashes.

Does everyone who has an opposing view from the majority get this punishment?

He was 100 percent correct in his tweets. Face it the anzac failure is now a massive commercial enterprise in which no dissent is tolerated lest it detract & devalue the brand. That's all it is now, a brand. As the old soldiers die so does the glorification of this piffling disgraceful culture of death increase 100 fold.

Ill timed and disrespectful. Putting all the weight of those crimes on John dinky di don't know any better Smith soldier and the Australian public is silly. Granted, he does have a point though, The victors do write the history.

If he is going to go full vigilante, Im disappointed he fails to mention the mass rape's/killings/lootings carried out by allied and soviet troops on the Germans fully endorsed by their leaders and media.

The terror bombings of German civilians, heinously slaughtered refugee's, exploitations of a defeated populace and executions of surrendered soldiers were particularly despicable.

He should get over it by moving on...hes making himself less employable by doing this

I think that ship sailed a long time ago :d

he better have a good lawyer ....at this rate i think he'd struggle to get a job at hungry jacks

I literally only feel patriotic about football.... Even Australia Day makes me cringe these days. I wish I could be patriotic, but... I'm just not

he could get work in Asia

Doing what exactly?

Rice farming :o

ESL

TESOL for a tosser.

Well, well, well

This shit with that journo is still going on?

He was looking for click-bait and an excuse to try and show Australians how stupid they are.

Ignore him and let his career die. He should be fired for a poor reflection on his employer. Not because he has an issue with ANZAC's/

Still has a career, and by the sounds of it - a stack of cash after this.

I don't care for his opinion but he's allowed to say it providing he can cop the backlash.

I am curious however, what would people think if someone wrote an article about preventing the construction of mosques in Australia? Of course there would be outrage and support, similar to McIntyre. Would they be up for dismissal? How long would it take for the word 'racist' to be brandished. Food for thought.

I think this is the price of being able to have an opinion in this country. It means we have to make time to listen to unpopular ones such as McIntyre's.

I've seen articles on people being fired for their social media opinions on the basis that the comments made on social media do not reflect their companies values, mainly in the USA. Where do we draw the line?

The fact that he refused to delete them showed he could cop itand was prepared to stand by it. But senior govt/rival media figures intervening to ensure he was sacked in a political move is disgraceful.

His tweets were robust, but nothing defamatory or totally untrue. As for 'what would people think if someone wrote an article about preventing the construction of mosques in Australia?' - they'd probably already have a job at Australia's biggest selling tabloids- the Herald Sun and Daily Telegraph

They would be fired without question and rightly so.

As a journalist you act as a physical representation of an organisation's values. If you deliberately want to troll ANZAC Day like McIntyre did, you can do so independently, or with a media organisation that wishes to do so.

That's what he did. He didn't do it on the TV show.

Reading SBS' grovelling statement, it sounds like they knew they were rooted if it went to trial.

The last time I signed an employment contract there were clauses in there regarding facebook, instagram and all that and bringing the company into disrepute. (They're pretty much standard these days.)

Unfair or not if that's what his contract said he shouldn't really be whinging nor should blokes be sticking up for him if he was using an account attached to him that was used for work purposes also. So the argument 'he didn't do it on the TV show' doesn't wash.

The summary on his Twitter account actually said this: 'Football reporter/presenter at SBS TV Australia. Asian football, from all corners of the continent.'

Then there was a link to the worldgame website.

Had he not had any of that on there then he would have been on stronger grounds and I'd probably defend him in that instance.

That's not to say I agree or disagree with what he said just taking what I assumed his employment conditions said vs what he did.

The fact that the settlement is undisclosed says everything. I don't see any 'grovelling' from SBS at all.

Probably settled it because it was going to run into 100's of thousands of dollars and everyone wanted out. With barristers at $5000 - $10000 an hour (3 day hearing = $120 to $240k per party) I'm betting all parties were keen to get out ASAP.



Edited by outonthefull: 11/4/2016 12:25:35 PM

He clearly was not a party to any clause with his social media ( in this account) as it would not have gotten that far. The gloating by his lawyers in the media today says it all.

As for $ his lawyers acted for pro bono

Edited by tsf: 11/4/2016 12:28:06 PM

And the 'grovelling' by SBS? Where's that bit?

Maurice Blackburn. Ambulance chasing scum.

Here's what SBS said at the time.

In a statement on Sunday, SBS managing director Michael Ebeid and director of sport Ken Shipp said the "inappropriate and disrespectful" comments had caused Mr McIntyre's "on-air position at SBS to become untenable".

"Mr McIntyre's actions have breached the SBS Code of Conduct and social media policy and as a result, SBS has taken decisive action to terminate Mr McIntyre's position at SBS, with immediate effect," the statement said.

"At SBS, employees on and off air are encouraged to participate in social media, however maintaining the integrity of the network and audience trust is vital. It is unfortunate that on this very important occasion, Mr McIntyre's comments have compromised both.

"SBS apologises for any offence or harm caused by Mr McIntyre's comments which in no way reflect the views of the network. SBS supports our Anzacs and has devoted unprecedented resources to coverage of the 100th anniversary of the Gallipoli landings."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/ww1/sbs-presenter-scott-mcintyre-sacked-over-inappropriate-anzac-day-tweets-20150426-1mtbx8.html

The settlement is UNDISCLOSED so unless you worked on the case you are guessing and using this as a vehicle to parade about some agenda you have.






Edited by outonthefull: 11/4/2016 12:41:29 PM

Yes, nobody knows the sum. But when lawyers write this:

"It has been a privilege to have represented @mcintinhos & settling his important case about free speech"

"I dedicate the settlement of Scott McIntyre's court case to the vigilantes & hypocrites who got him sacked"

does that sound like someone going with their tail between their legs?

Telling, he didn't say he breached his contract.

So basically you're making it all up because you don't haven't a clue but, bugger it, just blather on anyway.

And sorry I missed the bit about where the 'grovelling SBS' bit was?

As for the lawyer's quote. Sounds like an ambulance chasing scum bloke trying to drum up business.

That wasn't the point. That was the reasoning given by SBS.

I happen to think that he made some telling commentary regards his tweets. Probably not the best day to do it but that's not the point.

The point is/was he used a twitter account attached to his employer that reflected badly on them by association.

You bang on about the 'freedom' to express an opinion well then what about the 'freedom' of an employer to sack an employee who they think has acted like an arse?

You win. Just read the first 7 pages of this thread. It's all been covered before anyway.

That highkick bloke is/was rather special.