02 February 2007

The Final Round

It has been a week since the following emails were exchanged and I've heard nothing back from Junction11, the student radio station I used to have a show on. To refresh your memory, here's the original email from Junction11 and my reply.



For the sake of posterity, here's the short and less than sweet email I received from the head of Junction11 last Friday:
Following your decision to publish our correspondence on the internet, and your failure to accept our policy, I have no option but to remove you from Junction11. The matter on which I wrote to you was highly serious and it is clear that you did not treat it as such. Our station relies on trusting volunteers to represent Junction11 respectfully and maturely. Your dishonesty regarding the content of your show, and your attitude towards its criticism, illustrate that we cannot depend on you to adhere to our broadcasting policy and legal requirements.

This is with immediate effect.
And now for my reply, which is admittedly quite arsey and a shade pompous:
It was certainly not communicated to me in the body of the email, nor in any text below it, that our correspondence was confidential. As you are aware, [a member of the Junction11 executive] disclosed yesterday that you have been discussing this matter with others, and therefore, any duty of confidentiality appears not to exist. I would have been happy to take down the offending post if you had asked me. You seem to be applying a duty of confidentiality retrospectively, a most unsatisfactory situation. Perhaps you could clarify it to me?

I did act in a mature manner - indeed the nub of your complaint about "sexual profanity" appeared to be that I was being too mature. What exactly did I not approach with respect? I entered into an open dialogue with you as to the correct manner in which Junction11 presenters should behave - claiming that we should be allowed to talk about sex (in a non-perverse way, of course), use language freely in a non-offensive way and that criticism is a good, not a bad, thing for any organisation. You seem to have responded to this by simply shutting down any routes of communication and imposing a blanket ban.

I take attacks to the liberty of the individual extremely seriously, as my actions last year with Spark* will testify. I have been broadcasting with Alex on Junction11 for over a year, so claiming ignorance of my personality and approach to matters is not a route you can pursue. I try my best to lighten the mood, rather than enter into an all out fight. I'm sorry if you wished me to pursue a more aggressive strategy.

I obviously request that this matter be reviewed by an impartial, independent panel as soon as possible. I believe the Union's internal disciplinary procedures provide for this.
And an addendum email sent shortly afterwards:
Apologies, one more point - you accuse me of being dishonest regarding the content of the show. I see you have also sent this email to Alex Baker and would ask that you clarify to both of us how I have been dishonest.
As I said at the top of the post, I've heard nothing back and over the weekend I took this a bit hard.

* This link did not appear in the original email.

1 comment:

King Dumpalot said...

I thought you liked taking it hard?

:(