Should station involved in deadly water contest BE FORCED out of business?

[cboy4]

I think the station should be heavily (and I mean heavily) fined, and I think the victim's family should be successful in its civil suit against the radio station.

However, I'm still not sure whether I feel the station should lose its license.

The station should learn to be more responsible.

But it's not like this was the only morning shock jock drive team in the country to try an idiotic stunt....they all do stupid and dangerous stuff for the morning "zoo."

This contest did turn out deadly, and as angry and disgusted as I am with some of the attitudes/comments I've heard, I still can't convince myself the station should be wiped off the face if the radio dial.

I dunno, I feel torn.

http://www.news10.net/display_story.aspx?storyid=23635

[Mz Pip]

1. Certainly

the producer and hosts or whoever came up with this stunt should be held accountable - but for the whole station to be terminated, I don't know about that. I'd be curious to see if anyone in the management of the station even knoew about this.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[northzax]

2. nope. fined perhaps

and the DJs fired, no question. but let us not forget that Ms. Strange did, in fact, participate in this contest fully willingly, and she was an adult. Yes, they are jackasses, but she was an idiot as well, sorry to say.

So no, not even a civil suit in this case, I feel for her family, but and if she was a minor then I'd be ok with the suit, but if the radio station offers a Wii to the first adult to survive a jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, and someone does it and dies, who's fault is it?

[hippiechick]

4. Agreed.

n/t

[Warpy]

5. It's not like she had all the facts

and there is a tape of a nurse calling in to warn the station that the contest could turn fatal and why, a warning the station failed to pass along to the contestants.

In other words, they KNEW their participants were in grave danger and did nothing. The participants were kept in the dark.

Compare it to the liability over Vioxx. The company hid the life threatening side effects. Although people voluntarily took the pill, they were not allowed to know of the dangerous and sometimes lethal side effects.

Everyone at the station who had anything to do with this needs to be charged and tried. They knowingly put people's lives in danger over this stupid contest, and one participant did die.

The station needs a hefty fine. The license needs to be challenged when it comes up for renewal.

[KansDem]

8. I wondered about that too...

In other words, they KNEW their participants were in grave danger and did nothing. The participants were kept in the dark.

Did the release the station gave the participants contain information about hyponatremia?

http://health.howstuffworks.com/water-intoxication.htm">How can someone die from drinking too much water?

I've known about the possibility of this happening for 40-some years due to a discussion in a high-school science class...

[cboy4]

9. Incidentally, a local prosecutor says the release of liability

document is totally worthless in court.

One cannot "waive criminal neglect."

Those were his words on the news.

[Warpy]

20. You can't give legal permission to somebody to kill you

or to commit any other crime against you.

[cboy4]

33. Correct. n/t

[jilln]

10. I think all eating/drinking contests are idiotic

I wonder if the eating contests are potentially fatal.

[Warpy]

19. Rupture of the GI tract might be survivable

but it would be distinctly unpleasant for a very long time.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. Sure.

A person can choke.

[cboy4]

7. Yea, but I don't think jumping off of the Golden Gate and

a water drinking contest are fair examples.

I'd heard about water intoxication before this contest, so I knew the danger.

Sure, Ms. Strange probably should have raised more red flags in her mind about the health effects of too much water......but I mean, think about it....you see those pie eating and hot dog eating contests on TV all of the time.

Are those dangerous?

My only point is I don't think it's fair to blame the victim in this case.

She was a mom who was trying to win this game for her family.....a family that doesn't have a lot of money.

The radio station should have researched the dangers....but I think yanking 107.9 off of the air goes too far.

[jilln]

3. Tons of corporations kill people all the time

Pharmaceutical companies, gas and oil, automobile, etc.

They certainly deserve some punishment but the contestant participated willingly so I think this is actually less heinous than what goes on every day with no notice. Still heinous, obviously.

[depakid]

6. License non-renewal

needs to be enforced again- and made MUCH more likely and prevalent.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. How about the victims family?

Should they be fined for allowing her to participate in a dangerous contest?

[cboy4]

13. They should be sued on the cold day in hell it's determined

anyone 18 and older needs permission from anyone to do anything in a free country.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. Thanks, Cboy.

That's my point exactly.

[Pithlet]

26. I don't know.

I do think shutting the radio station down goes too far, but it should be held liable and the people who were in charge of setting this event up held accountable, don't you think? I don't think free country means corporations have no responsibility themselves.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. No, I don't.

I think it's basically a tragic accident. Like somebody choking to death at a pie eating accident. People want to assign blame, but there's nothing constructive that could come of it. The radio people are going to have to live with the guilt for the rest of their lives.

[Pithlet]

29. Sometimes there is blame to assign.

If they had told this woman that what she was doing was dangerous, had medical personnel nearby in case something went wrong, and to tell the contestants the signs to look out for for danger, and she still died anyway, then I'd agree. But they didn't do any of that, which makes them negligent. Plenty of similar events are held all over the country all the time, but the contestants are made aware of the dangers, and they usually have some sort of medical personnel on hand in case someone does start to choke (or whatever the sign of impending danger is). If radio stations and other corporations are going to hold these dangerous events anyway, they're obligated to take certain precautions and make sure they clearly define the dangers to the contestants so they can willingly participate with that in mind.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. Sometimes.

Not here.

[Pithlet]

31. Absolutely here.

They laughed it off when someone told them someone would die, and then did it anyway without telling the people that what they were doing was dangerous. They had taken no precaution to make sure no one died. If that isn't liable, then nothing is. It is not common knowledge, despite what some claim, that drinking a lot of water in a short period of time will kill you. In fact, it's so rare that usually what kills people is a medical professional mistaking their symptoms for something else. If a medical professional had been on site, they could have checked for those symptoms. It was their responsibility to do at least that much. They didn't, and one of the participants died. How is that not their fault?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. Are you going to have a medical professional...

on hand every time there's a pie eating contest?

[Pithlet]

34. Someone who knows the heimlich maneuver, at least.

If I decide to hold a pie eating contest, but choose not to take any precautions at all, then I should be held liable for any deaths. Just because there are idiots in the world doesn't mean one is free to exploit those idiots and get them killed, especially for entertainment and/or profit's sake. If you're going to hold an event that poses risks to the participants, you're legally and ethically obligated to take safety precautions. If you can't or won't, don't hold the event.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. Heimlich maneuver, eh?

So lets say it's not a medical professional, and he snaps off the victims xiphoid process, killing her in the process. Involuntary manslaughter?

[Pithlet]

36. No, Why would it be?

Unless the medical professional wasn't performing the maneuver correctly, in which case he or she may be held liable. But I'm off the hook because I provided that health professional. As long as I did my part to make the event as reasonably safe as I could, then I'm not anywhere near the level of depraved indifference those holding the event at the radio station were. I may still be sued, but I'd have a defense. If this radio station had done the bare minimum, even, it would be an entirely different story.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. Oh, it's a medical professional now?

Because in post 34 it was just some rube who knows the heimlich.

Medical professionals at every pie eating contest, eh? Sounds pretty dumb to me.

[Pithlet]

38. What do you think medical malpractice is all about?

Did this woman die at a pie eating contest? No, she did not. Did she die at the hands of a medical professional? She did not. You're changing the subject to deflect the blame away from where it belongs. If you think it's stupid to require corporations and other entities to have some responsibility over the promotional events they choose to sponsor, then no one can probably convince you. Luckily, there are legal responsibilities and the radio station ignored them, so they will likely be held liable, despite whatever the "personal responsibility" crowd thinks.

Besides, it really is stupid and short sighted for them to pull stuff like this. A little bit of effort by this radio station likely would have saved this womans life, and they wouldn't be looking at the negative publicity, which alone may be enough to kill the station, lawsuit or not.

[TheCowsCameHome]

12. Sue them until they're broke. Then see how they do.

[cboy4]

14. Yea, that always works. Look how badly O.J. is struggling

right now. :eyes:

[Crunchy Frog]

16. Sued into bankruptcy most likely. n/t

[cboy4]

17. Well the CEO is making at least 1.27 million dollars per year....

just by reading some of the financial information, the company appears to be able to withstand a major lawsuit, but who knows.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=etm

[KamaAina]

18. If it did, couldn't happen to a nicer RW media conglomerate

:nopity:

Entercom pulled AAR off one of its (six!) New Orleans stations, and get this, they now use the frequency for tape-delayed braodcasts of shows that just aired on their more powerful AM!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=155&topic_id=3435&mesg_id=3446

[entanglement]

21. Yes

[BuyingThyme]

23. Should the victim's family be fined too? Sued? Worse?

Who had more influence over this person, the radio station, or the family?

[cboy4]

24. Please tell me you're not serious. n/t

[Pithlet]

28. Who held the contest that killed her?

That's who's responsible. The radio station that was warned it could kill people and did it anyway. The radio station that didn't inform the people participating of the dangers. It's irrelevant if they themselves should have known because they weren't the ones holding the contest. The radio station was. The radio station that didn't have medical personnel nearby when they knew they were sponsoring a dangerous event. The way most other law abiding corporations do when they're holding dangerous events. If they'd done what they were supposed to do, the woman would likely still be alive. The radio station that pulled a stunt to get more ratings and more profit, and didn't let a little nit pick detail over the fact that that stunt could kill people. No one held a gun to that radio station's head, did they? Why are so many people on both sides of the political spectrum so reluctant to ever hold companies accountable?

[LeftCoast]

25. The station was clearly negligent, but w/out a pattern of negligent behavior

it seems excessive to me to put them out of business.

:shrug: