There was a story in Crikey this week under
the byline Barry Everingham claiming that I was responsible for the political
demise of John Brogden.
There is no evidence for the story and Mr Everingham
never sought to put these claims to me. The story was totally unprofessional and
I wonder how you can justify publishing a story based on pub tittle tattle to
which no one is prepared to put a source.
What is Mr Everingham’s evidence? Why
didn’t he check these so-called facts? Why do you publish this kind of
unsubstantiated smear? How can you also claim to uphold high journalistic
standards?I look forward to your response.
Crikey is committed to hosting lively discussions. Help us keep the conversation useful, interesting and welcoming. We aim to publish comments quickly in the interest of promoting robust conversation, but we’re a small team and we deploy filters to protect against legal risk. Occasionally your comment may be held up while we review, but we’re working as fast as we can to keep the conversation rolling.
The Crikey comment section is members-only content. Please subscribe to leave a comment.
The Crikey comment section is members-only content. Please login to leave a comment.