Very recently, Schapelle was grossly abused and hounded by a major Australian news corporation (Channel 9), in a way that would be completely illegal in this country, and which also violated multiple points of the Media Alliance's Code of Ethics. Media Watch completely ignored that story (although they were alerted to it by many people).
Instead, bizarrely relying on the word of prison officials, who routinely taunt Schapelle with the insult "White Monkey," AND cruelly threaten to move her away from family and friends (as clearly documented in this Sydney Morning Herald article 2007) - they chose instead to attack a single freelance journalist (with a history of supporting Schapelle), while scrubbing the Channel 9 outrage.
And of course, Media Watch's "Source" (Kerobokan prison officials), wouldn't have any reason to "Get" the same journalist Media Watch chose to pillory, would they? The journalist that exposed their filthy, corrupt World? (Scathing irony fully intended)
Here's what one particular supporter of Schapelle had to say about this, reproduced from Women for Schapelle on Facebook (nearly 1,000 members).
ABC STATE PROPAGANDA
Take your pick:
Channel Nine abuse a mentally ill woman's human rights, whilst aggravating her psychotic disorder by pursuing her in a third world prison with a television camera. She spends much of the next day begging her mother to allow her to kill herself.
Whilst she is in the process of a clemency appeal based upon her frail mental health, they present the non-medically qualified and remote prison governor claiming she is somehow ok, regardless of medical diagnosis, including that of one of Australia's most eminent psychiatrists.
They compound this by broadcasting another prisoner repeating the same propaganda for the governor, which in itself is clear abuse of that prisoner's rights.
All these activities would have been illegal in most parts of the world, but Channel Nine was instrumental in them.
This is a shocking hard news story by any standards, demonstrating gross media maltreatment of Schapelle Corby.
The prison governor of a third world prison disputes the authenticity of a letter produced in a womens magazine by an Australian journalist, which documents a prisoner transfer which has often been mooted previously.
Yes, that is it: the 'story'.
In real terms it simply amounts to a smear of a journalist supportive of Schapelle Corby.
Which of these two stories would a credible media team broadcast?
Which would a channel without a pre-set agenda broadcast?
MediaWatch, of your ABC, broadcast STORY 2, the smear story. They totally ignored STORY 1, the hard news story, even though they were furnished with detailed information by a number of sources, and even though the facts themselves were self evident via Channel Nine's actual broadcasts.
It is yet more cast iron evidence that the ABC and their broadcast units are still engaged in a mission hostile to Schapelle Corby's interest.
There is more on MediaWatch here: