Everybody hates Kristy

Kristy Fraser-Kirk has finally settled her $37 million claim against David Jones and its former CEO Mark McInnes. At last!

Sadly for her, she didn’t get that massive sum of money she wanted. Instead she received $850,000, which is still a lot of money. Never mind that she’s settled the case because Fraser-Kirk is not giving a single cent to charity.

What does that say about her character? In a statement, Fraser-Kirk says:

“I had asked the Court to award punitive damages, which was to go to charity, but as the Court will no longer be determining the case that’s no longer possible. I look forward, however, to participating in charitable work in the future.”

Pfft! What a lame excuse. Sorry guys, I would only give to charity if I got the sum I asked for, but since I didn’t I’m keeping it all to myself.

A cartoon by the Sydney Morning Herald’s cartoonist Cathy Wilcox explains this perfectly.

Well sorry Kristy, if you seriously cared about exposing sexual harassment in the workplace, you would have bettered your cause by perhaps giving some part of that money to an organisation or group that supports women.

A reader’s letter to the SMH probably explains it better.

“This is the latest distortion that has sadly affected Ms Fraser-Kirk’s credibility. First was the outlandish $37 million claim. ‘General damages in sexual harassment cases have never exceeded the low hundreds of thousands of dollars and ‘punitive’ damages are usually awarded in the low tens of thousands of dollars (if at all). Her claim can be viewed only as a poorly advised publicity stunt … To restore some credibility, she should donate some of the damages to charity. To say it is no longer possible is a distortion, and she knows.”

In a poll by the SMH, turns out most people agree that Fraser-Kirk was only out to get money.

Perhaps she was courageous (the other option) at first but any sympathy that I and probably many others had for her disappeared when she demanded $37 million, then asked David Jones to pay for her US holiday, and now this.

I hope she enjoys the money. She better save it because it’s highly unlikely any company will want to hire her now.

A wonderful example of how not to advertise online

Today, I was reading an article on the Sydney Morning Herald, but as I approached the half-way point in the story, I found my reading interrupted by a flashy advertisement promoting the Australian Stock Report.

I respect the fact that websites need to have ads (to survive),  and I’m fine with them being there. I’m even content with those annoying ads that unexpectedly pop up videos and even flash animation. If there’s an option to close it, the website is forgiven. However, the Australian Stock Report is an example of an obtrusive ad readers are forced to look at because part of it cuts through the article.  And no, there was no close option.

My five seconds of fame

Photo: Angela Brkic

Instead of discussing news or the media, I thought I’d briefly share about my little cameo in the Sydney Morning Herald’s Education Liftout on Courses and Careers.

Daily Telegraph gets hysterical over the dust storm

The Daily Telegraph's front page (24 September 2009)

The red dust storm that swept over Australia was big news yesterday and had residents taking pictures with their cameras. For the Daily Telegraph, this was such a major event that they made a special souvenir edition for their readers.

The Telegraph was treating the dust storm as an apocalyptic event even naming it DUSTY DOOMSDAY.

Australians are politically ignorant- surprised?

The weekend’s Sun-Herald exposed the biggest scandal this week, bigger than Kyle Sandilands’ statement that Magda could lose more weight in a concentration camp and bigger than John Della Bosca’s affair.

Misleading image

Had I not read the DIARY in the Sydney Morning Herald, I would have been very confused as to why the SMH Online contained a story about Paul Keating accompanied by an image of Janet Jackson.

It did look like a mistake to put a photo of Janet but it wasn’t. If you clicked for more information, you would have found that the Paul Keating story was only one of seven stories from the Diary. Janet was the second. She basically sang on Sunday Night’s MTV Video Music Awards as a tribute to Michael Jackson.

The Herald’s love for Cate

“CATE INJURED”! That was the headline that caught my eye the moment I opened my Sydney Morning Herald.

'CATE INJURED', the teaser as it appeared on Thursday's SMH

The story revolved around Cate Blanchett who was unfortunately injured during a fight scene in the Sydney Theatre Company’s production of A Streetcar Named Desire. Guess what page it was published on? PAGE 3- where most of the hard and important news is usually published.

When politicians are the news

Politicians are massive news hogs but it always irritates me when stories focus on their school yard bickering and corruption allegations. Let’s take Malcolm Turnbull for example.

Mr Turnbull has ruled the news for the past few months since the Utegate affair started in June. This catalysed a major hoo-hah that has backfired in the Opposition leader’s direction.

Posh Spice in Maddie case

A new chapter unfolded in the Madeleine McCann case with the search now focused on a person whose resemblance to Posh Spice has excited some of the media.

The woman, who is now the key to the investigation, appears in photo which has been published all over the media.  What I found very interesting is the difference between how the story was featured on the home pages of News.com.au and the SMH Online.

How the story appeared on News.com.au

How the story appeared on SMH Online