My two cents worth...

Nick D'Arcy and Kenrick Monk are in the firing range (pardon the pun, I couldn't help myself) of the national media after posting photos of themselves with guns on their facebook pages.

I have two problems with this... 

1) Why they would be stupid enough to do that and to allow people access to the photos (come on, privacy settings anyone?)

and

2) Why does everyone care? 

I know that my views on this will be very controversial to some and people will probably disagree with me wholeheartedly. However, as a journalism student, I feel that it is necessary to address what is being talked about in the media and weigh in on the subject. 

Firstly, the boys obviously did a stupid thing by posting photos of themselves with guns on their facebook pages. Whether or not they should be treated as role models because they are on the national swim team is another argument altogether (and one that is talked about a lot in the media, especially when our rugby boys get into mischief - which is far too often), they are in the public eye and thus this was probably not the best idea they've ever had. I personally disagree that posting that photo caused much harm, except perhaps on their reputations, but being a member of the younger generation myself, I don't see this photo and immediately think that posing with guns is 'cool' or something to aspire to do simply because these two are on the national swim team. Sometimes, I feel that small offenses are taken far too seriously when Australian sporting icons are involved. Yet, other offenses (particularly D'Arcy's last run in with the law) do warrant serious action. It can easily be argued that the media is definitely responsible for much of the hype regarding sports stars messing up, because such stories get a lot of priority in the news. Whether this is how it should be or not, they are considered news worthy by the media and I don't see this changing any time soon. 

Secondly, I'm quite frankly shocked that such serious measures have been taken by the AOC and Swimming Australia. Swimming Australia The AOC (Australian Olympic Committee) have excluded D'Arcy and Monk from attending the closing ceremony and ordered them to avoid using social media at all during the games. Monk mentioned that it was not the act itself of going to the rifle range but the act of posting the photos on Facebook that the organizations had objected to. As we all know, D'Arcy is no angel and boys will be boys but is it the role of the AOC and Swimming Australia to act as the boys' parents and ban them from using social media? Does the offense of posting a questionable photo on Facebook really warrant being banned from the closing ceremony? 

Evidently, both Monk and D'Arcy have displayed poor judgement but what they did was perfectly legal... Referring back to the discussion we had in class about advertisements being unethical vs. in poor taste, we see here a perfect example of something being ethical (considering the fact that they didn't break any laws) yet in bad taste (since some would consider them role models/ambassadors for Australian sport). Additionally, Swimming Australia organized for the team to visit a firing range for a 'team bonding exercise' in 2007... and are now saying that posting photos of the two doing it again is 'inappropriate'? That in itself is very questionable. 

I know that people may disagree with me but this my merely my thoughts on the subject so take from it what you will.

NOTE: I have recently opened my own twitter account and added Steve Molks after the last lecture because I loved his lecture and I love hearing his thoughts. I 'tweeted' to him asking about his view on the subject and he agreed with me that it's a massive media-led over reaction! I think I'm finally seeing how awesome twitter can be and how interesting it is to be in contact with people in the field. Hopefully, I can have more of these types of interactions as I continue with my journalism studies.