Michael Atkinson Clamps Down on Defamatory Comments (especially if they're directed at him)

Andronicus

Terror Australis
Mar 25, 2009
1,846
0
0
Recently the Escapist ran an article outlining Michael Atkinson's position on a new law [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/97959-Michael-Atkinson-Steps-Back-From-Pre-Election-Net-Censorship] requiring people to disclose their real names and postcode. In short, the Atkinson originally backed the law, but due to public outcry at its establishment, he is no longer in favour of the law, even though he has stated, and I quote, "There is no impinging on freedom of speech, people are free to say what they wish as themselves, not as somebody else."

In an act that clearly defies this statement, in response to a message posted on the AdelaideNow [http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/] news site, a man has been fined $20,000 for calling Atkinson a "crook".

In response to a story about bikie gangs back in December, one Dean McQuillan posted a comment calling Atkinson a "crook". The comment was very quickly replaced with this:
AdelaideNow Posted at 6.42PM... Today, a post appeared on AdelaideNow which referred to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson as a "crook"...

- AdelaideNow website, 8th December, 2009
And that was that. Or so it seemed to be.

Just a week ago, another apology was posted on the site as follows:
On 8 December 2009, a post appeared on AdelaideNow which referred to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson as a "crook". Once it was drawn to our attention, we removed it immediately.

AdelaideNow accepts that such a suggestion is unfounded and unreservedly apologises to Mr Atkinson for the post.

- AdelaideNow website, 22nd February, 2010
This comes in light of a letter sent to Mr. McQuillan on Christmas Eve, stating that the comment he posted was defamatory of Atkinson, but he would be quite willing to resolve the situation with $20,000 as compensation, and the publication of an apology and retraction of his original statement, to be posted on the AdelaideNow site.

Mr. McQuillan, who is bankrupt, sent a "robust response" to Atkinson, but has yet to receive a reply.

All of this, along with the original video done by Media Watch on the subject, can be viewed here [http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2833558.htm].

To be honest, I never thought the opinions of the masses of gamers wanting an R-rating was going to get Atkinson ousted from his position. However, what with the scandal of this particular law, and the obvious contradiction in terms of what it means for freedom of speech rights in Australia, I think if anything can get Atkinson kicked out of office, it's this.
 

PhunkyPhazon

New member
Dec 23, 2009
1,967
0
0
Everyone, call him a crook, now! He can't fine all of us and it can only harm his public image.

Atkinson is a crook! And a poopy head. And he likes to wear ladies underpants.
 

ERadical

New member
Aug 30, 2009
149
0
0
Atkinson is a croooooooooooooooooook. Internet anonymity gogogo.

But seriously, it's the Baby Boomers who have power and are not technologically adept. Well the ones in Parliament anyway...
 

iLikeHippos

New member
Jan 19, 2010
1,837
0
0
You can be fined for saying bad things on the internet?

Just me, or do you think the governments will become really fucking rich these past months?

Just track down each and every 13 year old on Youtube who posts dumb comments, and you're set for life, Mr. Atkinson.
 

Kollega

New member
Jun 5, 2009
5,161
0
0
Of course he does. Just like every iron ham-fisted dictator in the history of the world ever.

And he's a crook.
 

SL33TBL1ND

Elite Member
Nov 9, 2008
6,467
0
41
Andronicus said:
Recently the Escapist ran an article outlining Michael Atkinson's position on a new law [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/97959-Michael-Atkinson-Steps-Back-From-Pre-Election-Net-Censorship] requiring people to disclose their real names and postcode. In short, the Atkinson originally backed the law, but due to public outcry at its establishment, he is no longer in favour of the law, even though he has stated, and I quote, "There is no impinging on freedom of speech, people are free to say what they wish as themselves, not as somebody else."

In an act that clearly defies this statement, in response to a message posted on the AdelaideNow [http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/] news site, a man has been fined $20,000 for calling Atkinson a "crook".

In response to a story about bikie gangs back in December, one Dean McQuillan posted a comment calling Atkinson a "crook". The comment was very quickly replaced with this:
AdelaideNow Posted at 6.42PM... Today, a post appeared on AdelaideNow which referred to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson as a "crook"...

- AdelaideNow website, 8th December, 2009
And that was that. Or so it seemed to be.

Just a week ago, another apology was posted on the site as follows:
On 8 December 2009, a post appeared on AdelaideNow which referred to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson as a "crook". Once it was drawn to our attention, we removed it immediately.

AdelaideNow accepts that such a suggestion is unfounded and unreservedly apologises to Mr Atkinson for the post.

- AdelaideNow website, 22nd February, 2010
This comes in light of a letter sent to Mr. McQuillan on Christmas Eve, stating that the comment he posted was defamatory of Atkinson, but he would be quite willing to resolve the situation with $20,000 as compensation, and the publication of an apology and retraction of his original statement, to be posted on the AdelaideNow site.

Mr. McQuillan, who is bankrupt, sent a "robust response" to Atkinson, but has yet to receive a reply.

All of this, along with the original video done by Media Watch on the subject, can be viewed here [http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2833558.htm].

To be honest, I never thought the opinions of the masses of gamers wanting an R-rating was going to get Atkinson ousted from his position. However, what with the scandal of this particular law, and the obvious contradiction in terms of what it means for freedom of speech rights in Australia, I think if anything can get Atkinson kicked out of office, it's this.
Wow, gotta love hypocrasy. I seem to remember him calling all gamers crooks...
 

Olrod

New member
Feb 11, 2010
861
0
0
Andronicus said:
This comes in light of a letter sent to Mr. McQuillan on Christmas Eve, stating that the comment he posted was defamatory of Atkinson, but he would be quite willing to resolve the situation with $20,000 as compensation, and the publication of an apology and retraction of his original statement, to be posted on the AdelaideNow site.
Um, doesn't that count as blackmail or extortion or something? When someone claims to "be quite willing to resolve the situation with $20,000 as compensation" it does seem a bit crook-ish.
 

Machiavellian007

New member
Mar 2, 2010
194
0
0
Andronicus said:
a man has been fined $20,000 for calling Atkinson a "crook".
Atkinson: D: *sniffs* Why would call anyone call meeeee a crook? You know, looking over my dozens of broken or forgotten elections promises, the fact I'm a disgrace to the Labour party and that I pay convince 'scientists' and the media to banhammer games. I'm FLAWLESS!
 

Darth Caelum

New member
Jan 21, 2010
1,748
0
0
*Switching to Slender Man voice*
I WILL DEVOUR YOUR SOUL!!!!!I WILL SLAUGHTER ANY WHO GOES IN MY WAY!!!!
*ahem* What the hell! Mr Atkinson! Next thing you'll say is were more dangerous than BIkers!! [sub]oh........[/sub]
 

ottenni

New member
Aug 13, 2009
2,996
0
0
Yeah, lets all demand $20,000 from the bankrupt!!!

Seriously, there goes a great deal of his popularity.
 

AcacianLeaves

New member
Sep 28, 2009
1,197
0
0
Atkinson is a liar, a crook, and a corrupt cronie out only for his own self interest. He does not care about the people of Australia or protecting children. He is a man possessed by his own inflated ego, little more than a power hungry despot willing to go to any lengths to stay in office. Australia, you're better than this.

And you can fucking quote me on that.
 

Snotnarok

New member
Nov 17, 2008
6,310
0
0
Machiavellian007 said:
Snotnarok said:
Atkinson can burn in hell for all I care...

....

...No, really, he can.
Can robots burn in hell? I guess we'll find out...
I wouldn't call him a robot, more like a Nazi, you know because they oppressed their people and burned books.

Wait, telling people what they can can't see? Banning video games because of things HE doesn't want you to see? GASP. A connection.
 

Biosophilogical

New member
Jul 8, 2009
3,264
0
0
Wait ... someone got fined because they expressed their opinion that Michael Atkinson was a crook? Right after he said freedom of speech wouldn't be impinged? So what, free speech is now 'You can say whatever you want as long as I want you to say it'?

EDIT: I should probably point out that these questions are only half-rhetorical. If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me (except the last one, that was an obvious exaggeration of the issue at hand).
 

JaredXE

New member
Apr 1, 2009
1,378
0
0
He's a crook and a wimp and possibly a pedo....in my opinion.

Oh, what's that Mr. Atkinson? You think I am defaming you? Well it's just an honest opinion, and as far as I know, even in your increasingly fascist country, opinion is still protected by law.

Fucking idiot politician embezzling crook.
 

Machiavellian007

New member
Mar 2, 2010
194
0
0
Snotnarok said:
Machiavellian007 said:
Snotnarok said:
Atkinson can burn in hell for all I care...

....

...No, really, he can.
Can robots burn in hell? I guess we'll find out...
I wouldn't call him a robot, more like a Nazi, you know because they oppressed their people and burned books.

Wait, telling people what they can can't see? Banning video games because of things HE doesn't want you to see? GASP. A connection.
Oh God, now I'm imagining him organising a huge march in his honour... getting his Atkin-army to burn all video games... "Hail Kaiser!"

*shudders* I don't put it past him...
 

Biosophilogical

New member
Jul 8, 2009
3,264
0
0
Two things.
1. Did this story get large coverage in the media?
2. If it didn't yet, what's the bet it won't? After all, we can't have the media showing a negative side to a political figure!