13 March 2009

Vic Adams falls on his sword after Lundygate

| johnboy
Join the conversation
43

The ABC reports that local Labor Senator Kate Lundy has had to accept the resignation of her media adviser Vic Adams after he was found to be writing letters to the editor without disclosing his affiliation.

This follows our Liberal Senator, Gary Humphries, raising the issue.

Expect a vengeful Lundy faction to dig up a Liberal staffer engaging in the same behaviour as payback real soon now.

UPDATE: Senator Humphries’ office has made this statement to RiotACT:

    Senator Humphries did not in fact raise the issue; but responded to a Journalist’s queries yesterday afternoon.

    I understand that the Canberra Times journalist stumbled on the letter which was published in the Canberra Times last week and made the connection.

    Senator Humphries, nor his staff had anything to do with the information being published or in passing the information to anybody; despite Senator Lundy’s claims on ABC Radio this morning.

One suspects those assurances will not still the wrath of Kate. Letter writing Liberals will be holding their breath waiting to see which of them cops the payback.

(On the other hand, given the state of Kate’s website, maybe her vengeance isn’t to be feared so much.)

Join the conversation

43
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
betterdeadthanzed9:13 pm 18 Mar 09

Holden Caulfield is right again about deceptive advertising. Lucky for Humphries that the ACCC won’t come knocking. Anyway, didn’t Vic Adams claim Kate Lundy shared his opinions? That’s worth a sacking.

Holden Caulfield2:09 pm 16 Mar 09

jakez said :

As for the rest of it, I think you would have to look at it closely to invent the conspiracy theory type analysis you have of the brochure. I didn’t study the brochure in detail at the time and I didn’t when you linked it, and I still came to the conclusion I came to above.

Yes, but, unless I’m mistaken you have a connection to the Liberal Party, so what other conclusion should we expect you to come to? I’m sure you remember the controversy this leaflet caused and if it wasn’t for Jackie Kelly’s even bigger brochure balls up around the same time I dare say, locally at least, that Humphries would have been put under greater scrutiny.

A simple question, if the brochure was not a deliberate attempt to deceive, why was there no Liberal Party logo on the brochure?

The problem jakez, is that staffers have much more time than productive members of the community to engage in letter writing.

Unless they’re disclosing where all that time and animus comes from then the human beings in society will never get word in edgewise.

Which might be a desired outcome for staffers and their masters, but perhaps less so for the rest of us.

sepi said :

There are some jobs where you can’t separate someone’s private opinions from their public ones. Political jobs are clearly in that camp.

Can you imagine Kevin Rudd writing letters to the paper that conflicted with his prime ministerial statements, and claiming that he is allowed to have private opinions outside his job?

Well the distinction I would draw is that it isn’t Kevin Rudd but Vic Adam’s. Technically his role as Media Adviser does not require that he agree with Lundy’s positions (hell Lundy or any mainstream party politician doesn’t even agree with some of their own positions).

However we expect him to, so….he’s stuffed.

There are some jobs where you can’t separate someone’s private opinions from their public ones. Political jobs are clearly in that camp.

Can you imagine Kevin Rudd writing letters to the paper that conflicted with his prime ministerial statements, and claiming that he is allowed to have private opinions outside his job?

Holden I will take your Cadbury’s comment as an amusing and deliberate strawman as I am sure you did not think that the sometimes ridiculous aspects of IP apply to the point that I was making about the generic colour green.

As for the rest of it, I think you would have to look at it closely to invent the conspiracy theory type analysis you have of the brochure. I didn’t study the brochure in detail at the time and I didn’t when you linked it, and I still came to the conclusion I came to above.

Do I think the brochure is uncouth? Perhaps, however it is way down the list of electioneering techniques that I have a problem with (many of which are completely legal).

Holden Caulfield10:31 am 16 Mar 09

jakez said :

I don’t think anyone can own a colour however I’ll concede that to merely make the point that nobody in their right mind could think that was from Lindsay Tanner.

Firstly, you can own a colour. Try releasing a new chocolate with a purple wrapper and see how long it takes for a Cadbury’s lawyer to get in touch. Plenty of other examples of trademarked colours too, but that’s by the by.

In regards to thinking the brochure was from Lindsay Tanner or not, you are making the fatal assumption that people actually read this things closely, haha. And if a punter did read it there would be plenty who would be trying to work out why Tanner was dissing the ALP-Greens.

The point is, nowhere on that brochure did it declare clearly that it was printed/funded by Gary Humphries and/or the Liberal Party. An otherwise anonymous street address is hardly a clear and unambiguous notification.

pelican said :

Probably an ill-advised move but one has to ask…does it really matter if a letter writer is affiliated? Aren’t we all affiliated with something?

We are all indviduals with a view as well as employees. If he is writing as himself and not on behalf of Kate Lundy or the ALP does it matter?

Just another opinion on an opinion page.

I think it all depends though. In an ideal world I’d agree with you, however in the world we are currently in, considering Vic’s position and the content of the letters he was writing, I think this was probably appropriate. Depending on Lundy’s prior knowledge, perhaps a reprimand may have been more appropriate (I don’t know).

With regards to push polling, I consider it unethical, particularly when it is used as a vehicle for slander.

I generally have a large dislike for negative campaigning based on distortions and lies, especially considering that the most famous attack ad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_ad) killed the Presidential campaign of one of my political heroes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater).

The letters page is right near the end now, after the stockmarket stuff etc.

i think it should be further forward in th paper – it is one of the bits I always read.

The arts pages seem to have disappeared altogether tho.

memberforbelconnen12:44 pm 15 Mar 09

The pages were there, MWF.

R. Slicker said :

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that nobody bothers to read The Canberra Times anymore.

I read it today. I couldn’t find the Letters to the Editor page. Is it there, or is it just me?

Probably an ill-advised move but one has to ask…does it really matter if a letter writer is affiliated? Aren’t we all affiliated with something?

We are all indviduals with a view as well as employees. If he is writing as himself and not on behalf of Kate Lundy or the ALP does it matter?

Just another opinion on an opinion page.

pie eating ability is vital in an elected representative.

Holden Caulfield said :

jakez said :

Holden Caulfield said :

It’s still not as bad as Gary Humphries pretending to be a Green, pretending to be Lindsay Tanner like he did during the 2007 Federal Election.

Can you elaborate for me please?

Sure…

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh177/Holden-Caulfield/greens_broch_inner.jpg
http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh177/Holden-Caulfield/greens_broch_outer.jpg

Ahh right it was the Lindsay Tanner bit taht threw me off.

I don’t think anyone can own a colour however I’ll concede that to merely make the point that nobody in their right mind could think that was from Lindsay Tanner.

What will Katie do, eat another pie?

sepi said :

Wierd that LUndy hadn’t noticed his letters up to now tho – or didn’t she care?

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that nobody bothers to read The Canberra Times anymore.

Wierd that LUndy hadn’t noticed his letters up to now tho – or didn’t she care?

If the idiot declared his affiliation in the first place there may not have been the problem. Though to have a staffer going around flinging their extreme points of view can’t be good for the reputation of the boss or the office, preventing staff from making such comments in the public domain would be a sensible move.

Holden Caulfield8:19 pm 13 Mar 09

Clown Killer said :

If you’re dumb enough to fall for a push poll then the fault lies with you.

Not sure if this comment is in reference to mine, but there was no push poll, it was blatant misrepresentation in the form of a political brochure. Links to the offending item were just posted and are waiting for johnboy to approve.

Holden Caulfield8:18 pm 13 Mar 09

jakez said :

Holden Caulfield said :

It’s still not as bad as Gary Humphries pretending to be a Green, pretending to be Lindsay Tanner like he did during the 2007 Federal Election.

Can you elaborate for me please?

Sure…

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh177/Holden-Caulfield/greens_broch_inner.jpg
http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh177/Holden-Caulfield/greens_broch_outer.jpg

amarooresident2 said :

And the Gary Nairn Chief of Staff example you use is probably not the best one. If I remember correctly he compared Mike Kelly and members of the ADF to concentration guards at Auschwitz at a public meeting. Shamefully, Gary Nairn didn’t sack him.

That guy was out of control, he was screaming and yelling and being loudly abusive at public meetings, wihtout announcing his official position, and just howling down Major Kelly when he tried to answer the accusations. It was rude, and weird.

Holden Caulfield said :

It’s still not as bad as Gary Humphries pretending to be a Green, pretending to be Lindsay Tanner like he did during the 2007 Federal Election.

Can you elaborate for me please?

Clown Killer4:48 pm 13 Mar 09

If you’re dumb enough to fall for a push poll then the fault lies with you.

Holden Caulfield4:45 pm 13 Mar 09

It’s still not as bad as Gary Humphries pretending to be a Green, pretending to be Lindsay Tanner like he did during the 2007 Federal Election.

So what do ClownKiller and jakez feel about pushpolling? Adam’s letters are not much different to that as far as I can see.

Firstly, I haven’t put forward a position. Secondly, I’ve already pointed out the reality of the situation.

Thirdly, yes I am an idiot.

Fourthly, it is a perfect example because it reflected on Gary Nairn and that is the issue I was referring to. I did not raise the subject of whether these people should be sacked for their actions, only whether their bosses should, not are, should be coloured by the opinions of their staff.

My position is that it depends.

amarooresident23:51 pm 13 Mar 09

jakez said :

George said :

It was Mike Kelly Jake.

Oh yeah. Who the hell is Mick Keelty then? Did I make that up?

frontrow said :

What’s an ideal world, Jakez? Is it just a world where I get to be king and all the oiks have to do what I say?

That’s not my ideal world frontrow.

I sympathise with your position Jakez, but the reality is undermining your boss publicly is going to get you into a world of trouble every time, particularly where politics is concerned.

Mick Keelty is the boss of the AFP.

And the Gary Nairn Chief of Staff example you use is probably not the best one. If I remember correctly he compared Mike Kelly and members of the ADF to concentration guards at Auschwitz at a public meeting. Shamefully, Gary Nairn didn’t sack him.

Oh he is too. Lucky I’m not Leader of the Opposition. Kim Beazley was done for a similar transgression.

Keelty is “top cop” or at least at present.

George said :

It was Mike Kelly Jake.

Oh yeah. Who the hell is Mick Keelty then? Did I make that up?

frontrow said :

What’s an ideal world, Jakez? Is it just a world where I get to be king and all the oiks have to do what I say?

That’s not my ideal world frontrow.

What’s an ideal world, Jakez? Is it just a world where I get to be king and all the oiks have to do what I say?

It was Mike Kelly Jake.

In my opinion, a Party ceases to be anything other than a mere political brand if they don’t usually vote together. Under the current system I can investigate the detailed political platforms of the major parties and know that if I vote for a candidate from that party, they can be expected to vote for that platform. Under the alternative I know nothing other than the candidates vague leanings (as shown by the political branding they have chosen) and whatever minimal platform they have decided to disclose.

Being a boss (despite the derision with which my staff greet this suggestion whenever I remind them) I’d like to think that staff have a duty of care re their employer’s reputation, an obligation to follow lawful directions etc. As Vic was a media adviser, he could hardly have been ignorant of the implications of what he was doing.

It’s not the letter-writing that matters anyway, it’s the undermining of the boss. Ask Malcolm Turnbull.

Well let’s ignore the reality for a second and see what people think should be the case. In our current political climate, staffers basically can’t have opinions of their own (another recent example was Gary Nairn’s Chief of Staff at a public meeting with Mick Keelty).

In an ideal world, should staffers be able to be their own person? Should their opinions reflect on their boss or should they be able to separate their job and their private personas? Does it matter that Vic Adams’ letters were so aggressive?

What about politicians? Do you consider a split vote in a Parliamentary Party or a non binding caucus a sign of disunity? If it were on policy issues and not personality issues, would a Party that allows for split voting appeal to you? Would it completely turn you off?

Free speech for the dumb!

I don’t work for anyone justbands. If letters to editors are reasonably polite and constructive then I don’t care who the writer is. But if you are pushing a political line as hard as Adams does then he should disclose his affiliation as far as I am concerned. Stanhope’s adviser, Jeremy Lasek used to do the same thing as Adams.

I wasn’t able to write letters to the editor when I was a staffer to Humphries. It’s pretty standard I would have thought and I’m shocked Vic Adams would do it, especially as he was her Media Adviser.

Considering the acerbic nature of his letters, it’s all the stranger.

It’s a cycle though. Staffers can’t write letters because they can’t separate themselves from their boss, only because that has become the standard. It only exists because it exists.

It’s like our ridiculously strict party system. You can’t cross the floor because it is seen as dissent and disunity. It is seen as dissent and disunity because it never happens anymore. In the US, it’s par for the course.

What kind of a Media Advisor does something like this in the first place? Nuts!

Clown Killer2:17 pm 13 Mar 09

This is lame. If the author of a letter is presenting their own views and arguments and not claiming to represent the position of another individual or organisation then there is absolutely no need what-so-ever to declare any affiliation – if anything there is an obligation to distance themselves.

The real losers here are the electorate, because once again we get our noses rubbed in what our representatives really spend our money on – bitchy little tit-for-tat games. Humphries is diminished by getting involved and Lundy’s effort of 666 this morning simply once again confirms her oxygen-bandit status.

& you work for who then ricci? 😉

Nah…fair enough he gets the boot. I’m sure a lib staffer in fairly recent history got the a**e for the very same.

Adams writes letters to all the newspapers without disclosing his affiliation with the ALP and Lundy should have stopped it long ago. His letters are always aggressive, contain personal attacks on those he writes about, are never constructive and are often abusive (might be good subscriber to RiotAct).

I’m glad he has been “outed” and it is another case of “what comes around goes around” and I can think of no one more worthy of getting bitten on the bum or hoist by his own petard.

colourful sydney racing identity1:54 pm 13 Mar 09

*sheesh* he used his own name? That shows such a serious lack of judgement it would be reason enough to sack him – Amateur.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.