Plushenko wants TV commentator charged with libel

[overedge]

Blind Freddie could see he was in agony at Euros. The pain was obvious. He has injuries, well-reported, that have been worked on for years. Why suddenly this injury, this surgery? If it had been ANY OTHER SKATER who had had a short like Plushenko's at Euros and then pulled out, no-one would have cared. In fact he would have been praised for listening to his body. But because it's Plushenko, he MUST be faking it. It's wrong.

You haven't looked at some of the "faking it" posts about Virtue/Moir at 4Cs, have you?

[Glacier cat]

Is it the same idiot who was claiming Rochette was crying after skating her Olympic SP just to get more points?

If your guess is true, he makes me feel terrible. The man who said it didn't know Joannie's situation at that time? Awful comment even if the person dislikes her

[misskarne]

You haven't looked at some of the "faking it" posts about Virtue/Moir at 4Cs, have you?

I've also seen a great deal more vigourous defence of V/M than I have of Plushenko.

[IceAlisa]

Has anyone listened to the video where he speaks of Plush and surgery during men's warm up? Does it look/sound like a journalist who investigated further a case and shed some light, or someone who read a yellow article-newspaper and just repeated it? Did he speak any facts? He says Plushenko does a lot of PR so this is one more of it. I understand very few of what he says but he doesnt look like Miss Marple to me.

Thanks for the video. The short version is that the commentator said he doubts Plushy's had the surgery since none of the Israeli clinics that had been asked, can locate him.

[misskarne]

Thanks for the video. The short version is that the commentator said he doubts Plushy's had the surgery since none of the Israeli clinics that had been asked, can locate him.

I don't think it's "can locate him". I think it's "refuse to locate him". The clinics aren't about to jump up and down and say "oh yes, Plushenko is here!". They have patient confidentiality to maintain.

[IceAlisa]

I don't think it's "can locate him". I think it's "refuse to locate him". The clinics aren't about to jump up and down and say "oh yes, Plushenko is here!". They have patient confidentiality to maintain.

If I were any clinic and whether or not Plushy were there, I'd ask what is your relation and if they said none or media, I'd say this is confidential. Likely what happened.

[misskarne]

If I were any clinic and whether or not Plushy were there, I'd ask what is your relation and if they said none or media, I'd say this is confidential. Likely what happened.

Yep. That's what I meant.

But it's rather stupid. Any journalist worth their salt would know that you can't just ring up a hospital and say you're looking for someone, and expect them to tell you...

[Glacier cat]

Maybe 'the Israeli media' was masquerading as Queen Elizabeth or Vladimir Putin to ask for inside information of Plushy [S]Middleton[/S] but failed. So they wrote there was no such operation and hospital and the Eurosport commentator has read about the story in The Sun.

[misskarne]

Maybe 'the Israeli media' was masquerading as Queen Elizabeth or Vladimir Putin to ask for inside information of Plushy [S]Middleton[/S] but failed. So they wrote there was no such operation and hospital and the Eurosport commentator has read about the story in The Sun.

You know, that incident was the first place my mind went when this all blew up.

[TAHbKA]

I'll admit I'm kind of suspicious about this whole "Israeli sources" thing. I have seen no coverage of Plushenko being here in any local media, let alone any questions about the purpose of his stay.

There you go

[Zemgirl]

There you go

Oh, thanks - I didn't think to use that spelling (for those who don't read Hebrew, the article spells his name as Plushchenko), so nothing came up when I searched. That explains it

They don't seem to find the whole thing suspicious, though. Did the local Russian-language media report anything of that sort?

[yaya124]

Oh, thanks - I didn't think to use that spelling (for those who don't read Hebrew, the article spells his name as Plushchenko), so nothing came up when I searched. That explains it

They don't seem to find the whole thing suspicious, though. Did the local Russian-language media report anything of that sort?

I come cross this article which gives some possible explanations for the reason why Israeli bloggers try to spread the rumours.

[loulou]

I'm pretty sure patients would be entitled to privacy, and their information would not be shared without their consent. So even if there were such reports in the local media it means nothing.

Once again: journalists should certainly be free to conduct investigations and report on them.

Journalists shouldn't just be free to investigate, it's precisely their job to do so, to confirm the stories they report, to double check official statements, to draw their own conclusions. That's why journalist stories are meaningful.

This does not mean that they are entitled to absolute and unrestricted access to every type of information in existence.
[...]
If "journalists dig patient histories up all the time", they may well be breaking the law

Journalists aren't entitled to unrestricted access to every type of information. But since piecing informations up is an important part of a journalist job, they have their ways to do so, and they learn how to best protect themselves from breaking laws in the process (not that the process doesn't carry risks).

The Pope's (the pope's!) private letters and documents have been published in books and papers, and not a single journalist has had troubles with the law.

Being famous, or even publicly funded, does not mean that you have no expectation of privacy whatsoever or that medical confidentiality laws do not apply to you.

Being a public figure doesn't mean that confidentiality laws do not apply to you, but it certainly means that your privacy expectations should be lower.

And BTW, as a general point and not related to Plushenko: being a public figure is not necessarily a choice. Some people are involved in high visibility professions and avocations even though they are not particularly interested in being in the public eye and becoming celebrities.

Of course being a public figure is a choice.
If one doesn't like the high profile of what he/she does, then by all means may he/she feel free to do something else.

I'm more concerned about the human rights of the patient - in this case, Plushenko.

I think that's the core issue of this news.

A few days ago I was reading that the Sochi Olympics are going to be the most expensive in history. The piece went on saying that a few russian papers closed right after they wrote on how constructions and dumpings are conducted, saying things that were not along the lines of official statements (terrifying things).
Then I read Plushenko is taking a sports journalist to court, in a country that's known for not having a free press or fair courts, right before the Olympics.
These two piece of news together do not paint a nice big picture.

You are worried about Plushenko's privacy, I am most concerned about is the kind of life an average person has in a country with no free press and no right to justice.
I think Plushenko's not helping the issue, and I think that whatever reason he may have, or whatever case he may make are far less important than helping his country on the two most sore issues it has.

I didn't wish to comment in other other way on the case: I said that's less relevant than worrying about press and courts in Russia, in my opinion.

[loulou]

Personally I think just threatening to sue is good enough here. It gets the point across well enough and tarnishes the reputation of the journalist without having to spend a lot of time and money.

Plushenko could have ridiculed the journalist's work by simply producing a doctor note: "The guy had surgery".
A threat of any sort is less effective on the journalist's reputation, and unfortunately more harming under different points of view.

While discussing the specifics of why a country's press freedom declines, Trasparency International have mentioned in the past that law suits against journalists are a contributing factor. It doesn't really matter if the suits are legally sound, nor if they result in a victory/partial victory of the plantiff.
Law suits take time and respurces, laws are complex, results are often uncertain: all those reasons can scare journalists, even those that are trying to to their job at the best of their abilities and in good faith.

It's a matter of opportunity: in my opinion, lawsuits against journalists should be carefully pondered, and should be the very last resort in case of serious harm. That is even more true in the russian scenario.

[senorita]

I bet if you were in bed after disc surgery and someone even here anonymously called you a liar, let alone on eurosport , you would jump all over and wouldnt think how to save Russian's freedom of speech issues.. You sound like Plush is taking to courts any journalist who writes sth bad about him, and I m sure there are quite few journalists who do him no favor there. But thats not the case of freedom speech, he is a public figure, he has lots of sponsors, he is Sochi Ambassador and the said journalist was talking crap.

[yaya124]

Channel 1 provided videos and interviews from doctors to prove Plushenko had surgery. But that does not prevent Zhurankov from saying in his opinion there was no operation. Plushenko is not the one destroying journalist reputation.

To point out defects on construction or corruptions and got banned is one thing, to slander a well known sportsman's reputation is another. If you think these two types of journalists are at the same level, you are insulting the real journalists.

Lawsuit maybe a bit extreme, but the whole thing is not Plushenko's fault. He is in a very difficult time and got stabbed from the back, maybe in your opinion he should just smile and allow himself bleeding to despair. Because he is a wealthy man and Russia has problem of free speech.

[Zemgirl]

Plushenko could have ridiculed the journalist's work by simply producing a doctor note: "The guy had surgery".
A threat of any sort is less effective on the journalist's reputation, and unfortunately more harming under different points of view.

While discussing the specifics of why a country's press freedom declines, Trasparency International have mentioned in the past that law suits against journalists are a contributing factor. It doesn't really matter if the suits are legally sound, nor if they result in a victory/partial victory of the plantiff.

The comment was made after Plushenko and his wife made public various medical details. It is not their responsibility to provide these, or any other details nosy people are interested in. However, it was the responsibility of the person making the allegations that Plushenko was faking the injury to prove his case. Which he didn't. You appear foolish for suggesting otherwise.

For the last time: being a journalist is not free reign to publish or say anything you please about anyone in existence, famous or not. If you want to allege something happened, back it up with solid evidence. If you can't do that, don't be surprised if there are financial and professional consequences. People have a right to privacy and medical confidentiality - even famous people! - and this is something you seem blithely unconcerned about. The public does not have a right to know Plushenko's medical business. Period. Even if he does get public funding, government employees are paid from taxpayers' money, too - so what? Does did mean their rights should be waived?

I'm sure if you were in Plushenko's position, you'd be ever so understanding and ready to turn the other cheek.

[MacMadame]

Journalists shouldn't just be free to investigate, it's precisely their job to do so, to confirm the stories they report, to double check official statements, to draw their own conclusions. That's why journalist stories are meaningful.

And when a journalist writes obvious rubbish, that hurts all journalist everywhere. Where is your concern for the harm this journalist did by writing obvious garbage with pretty much no research behind it that makes it seem like journalists are liars who will say anything to sell their stories?

I said that's less relevant than worrying about press and courts in Russia, in my opinion.

And I say that telling people in a country that has issues with a free press that they have to lay down and take it whenever a yellow journalist write lies about them because somehow this will help create a free press is naive at best.

[ItalianFan]

In this case though, I think it's just a matter of perspective. As I said, on one side there's a man who's already very blessed, on the other there is something that involves important human rights which affect the entire Russian population (and more). What Plushenko is doing isn't helpful, given the scenario he's in.

I don't think so either, nor I know how you figured that I'd think anyone who leaves the house signs away their right to privacy, of that press freedom would mean you can slander people.

Ideally, it would be nice if everyone's rights were protected, including Plushenko's.
But that's not the case, it's expecially not the case in Russia, and Plushenko is not the one who's suffering from Russia's isssues.
I would like him and everyone else to see the big picture, use some perspective, and then decide what's the best path.

In other words what you're saying is that Plushenko should let the whole issue drop just because there is no freedom of speech in Russia? A slanderous remark that reflects negatively on his reputation is unimportant in this framework? That's ridiculous.

[ItalianFan]

[QUOTE=loulou;3837230]

The Pope's (the pope's!) private letters and documents have been published in books and papers, and not a single journalist has had troubles with the law.


The Pope's personal valet who stole the documents and passed them on to the journalist was tried and convicted. But the Pope forgave him his crime, even though after that the man was banished from Vatican City and cannot live there any more. I can't remember if he is serving his sentence in jail or was granted "home imprisonment" as happens when the crime is not particularly heinous. I don't know what happened to the journalist who utilized the papers for his book.