January 24, 2010

In response to Irish Mail on Sunday ..

Filed under: Uncategorized — by melaniedawn @ 3:30 pm

I deleted my blog this morning. I didn’t know what else to do. I was minding my own business when I got a call from a good friend of mine sympathising with me about the Mail on Sunday article.

“What Mail on Sunday Article?”

“The one about you! I had no idea – I though you were happy in your job?”

“I am happy in my job – what are you talking about?”

“You told the Mail on Sunday that your workmates were sexist and treated you really badly – there’s a picture of you and everything”

And, just like that, my day fell apart. I don’t really know what to do. I didn’t know that this happened, or could happen, to people like me.

In November, I wrote a blogpost called “Women? In Air Traffic Control?”. I wrote it in response to people on Twitter and in my life who wanted to know what it was like to do my job. There aren’t many of us. Most people don’t meet many Air Traffic Controllers, and it has, in films, media, and most portrayals, been depicted as a job done mainly by men. You can read the post for yourself, it’s below.

I tried to talk in it about what it was like for me, nearly a decade ago, being one of the first women to do my job in Ireland. I didn’t then, and do not now, think my work colleagues are “Male Chauvinist Pigs”, as the Mail headlined their article. I love my job, and the people I work with. I was talking about how I felt years ago, starting out, slightly scared and intimidated by the responsibilities that people who do my job hold in our hands.

Yes, back then, some things bemused me. For example, I wrote in that post that two women weren’t allowed to work together. That was then, and things have changed, and my original post makes that clear in the very next line. For the Mail to quote that line in order to make it appear that I am unhappy in my job, that my colleagues are sexist, or that I ever felt or feel unwanted, is disgusting.

The Mail never told me they were writing a piece about my blog. The journalist who wrote it never sent me an email asking me questions about my blog. I won’t do to his professional reputation what he has done to mine, but let’s just say that I wonder whether he would have expected me to answer his questions the way he wanted.

As it is, in the middle of an incredibly trying time for my colleagues, an article has appeared in a Sunday Newspaper that says I feel abused by the people I work with. It gives me opinions that I do not have, and uses words I have never said. It does so to attack my profession, impugn my employers, and portray me as a victim of my friends.

I feel sick. Any future employer could fairly read what Luke Byrne has written about me and conclude that I am a disloyal, untrustworthy person. The people I work with today could, and probably have, read it and decided that I am not on their side, and that I think that they are sexist, nasty, bullies. None of this is true.

I don’t “do” media. Other than friends who happen to work in the media, or people given tours of where I work, I’ve never dealt with a journalist. This blog was supposed to be an account of my life, what I do, and how I got here. Today it has been transformed into a weapon to be used by an unscrupulous, nasty person against some of the people I care most about.

My first reaction was to delete everything. I wiped it all away. Then I realised it was the only monument to my actual opinions that exists for people to read. If it’s gone, then all that is left is an article that turns me into somebody else who thinks things that never did or would cross my mind.
I don’t know whether I have a cause of action. I’m not a lawyer. Maybe twisting my words and my ideas into something perverse is totally legal.

Maybe not giving me a right to respond is totally legal. Maybe not even telling me there was going to be an article is totally legal. Publishing my photograph without my knowledge or consent probably is totally legal. But I don’t know how it could be. I’ve never ever felt this low. All I have ever tried to do is do a good job for the people I serve and the people I work with. I want to be thought well of, to be happy, and to be respected. How anybody who works with me could read that article and either respect or think well of me, I don’t know.

I’m sure this happens to other people all the time. Probably people who are far more famous than me. I’ve probably read and formed opinions of other people based on things that are just not true. I’ve probably talked about other people’s lives based on things I’ve read that were hurtful to them.

I just can’t get my head around it. I could never, ever, ever do this to somebody else. I don’t understand how they couldn’t ask me for a comment. Or for my actual opinion. Instead, there’s a whole page of a national newspaper devoted to what I think of the people I work with, when in fact I think pretty much the exact opposite.

I don’t know what I’m going to do – or what I can do. But I know that I’m not going to leave it at this. Advice would be gratefully recieved.

To my work colleagues, I’m so, so, so, sorry. The person in that article is not me. It’s a twisted version of me, built to suit the nasty agenda of a journalist who doesn’t know me, and has never met me. I don’t know what more to say.


Due to the overwhelming support I have received, I am unable to keep track of the comments and have decided to close the comments sections for now. I would like to thank everybody for their support, it has been a tremendous help during this difficult period. You can find me on Twitter (@mrs_schregardus ) where I can better keep track and respond.



  1. Mel,

    Call the newspaper immediately and tell them you want a full apology in tomorrow’s paper or you will consult a solicitor. This is totally unethical and NOT best practice in journalism. Make the call right now and ask to speak to the editor.


    Comment by Margaret — January 24, 2010 @ 3:44 pm

  2. Here’s a link to the office of the press ombudsman:

    Comment by Padraig O'Morain — January 24, 2010 @ 3:47 pm

  3. That is really shocking. This is gone beyond lazy journalism. I think you should get some legal advice about this. I don’t understand how they can put a picture of you and your words without some sort of consultation or warning you. Unbelievable.

    Comment by Jennifer Farley — January 24, 2010 @ 3:48 pm

  4. […] If you read only one thing this week – make it this. […]

    Pingback by The Mail on Sunday should be ashamed. : John McGuirk — January 24, 2010 @ 3:49 pm

  5. Firstly hold your head up high, take your time and we will find a solution to this terrible act that has portrayed you as something you are definitely not. You have been victimised and make look like something that we all know you are not. Thats what the papers do. In the meantime you have my full support albeit from afar. Trust me I know what it is like to be in your shoes. You are not alone and dont let the bastards get you down. This will be resolved, trust me.

    Chin up, Angel


    Comment by Tony Frattaroli — January 24, 2010 @ 3:51 pm

  6. Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by john_mcguirk: If you read only one thing today, read this. The Mail on Sunday should be ashamed:

    Trackback by uberVU - social comments — January 24, 2010 @ 3:55 pm

  7. This is truly horrific. I do hope you haven’t deleted your blog permanently. I think it would be wise to retain at least some digital copy of the content to which you refer.

    If you have deleted this, and have no way to recover the content, feel free to ping me and I’ll try to help you get some of this back from various web history sources.

    Sorry to hear about your woes, and hopefully some good will come of this, at least if it means that people know the truth.


    Comment by Richard Hearne — January 24, 2010 @ 3:57 pm

    • This is horrifying, and I will be retweeting like anything. I am so sorry for you, and very much hope your blog is still there somewhere so it can be read. Richard? I have lost a blog that was deleted by AOL. Can you let me know if it is possible to find the content somewhere? Thanks.

      Comment by Josa Young — January 25, 2010 @ 10:32 am

  8. So sorry that this happened, though mostly
    I only read your Tweets (which I enjoy)
    and didn’t know about the Mail story.

    Don’t take the shit!

    C Murray

    Comment by poethead — January 24, 2010 @ 4:01 pm

  9. Melanie,

    Just to let you know, you DEFINATELY have an action. If you drop me an email, I can give you some precedent to support you. You should (if not taking an action) DEFINATELY seek a retraction.

    I think its disgraceful what they have done to you and just shows more of the unethical, immoral actions by certain factors of the media. Its disgusting.

    If i can be of any help, do drop me an email.

    Comment by Claire O Sullivan — January 24, 2010 @ 4:02 pm

  10. OMG That’s awful 😦

    I don’t know what to say, if there’s anything I can do to help, please let me know.


    Comment by Claire Boyles — January 24, 2010 @ 4:08 pm

  11. As far as I know, you only have a legal right if they have defamed you – ie, said something you didn’t say, which they didn’t, even though they took it out of context. Publishing photographs is illegal unless they own the copyright, so there is recourse for action there, but it’s unlikely to get anywhere. If I were you I would get in touch with the Press Ombudsman and see if you can get any help there, and I would write emails of complaint to the general and news editors of the paper, who may not have known where the journalist was getting his information. This is a really horrible thing to happen anyone; you have my utmost sympathies.

    Comment by Rosemary — January 24, 2010 @ 4:10 pm

  12. If you are quick you can probably get most of the articles back from the Google cached copies.

    Comment by Bob — January 24, 2010 @ 4:13 pm

  13. Mel,

    I’m disgusted at this type of gutterpress. He is deliberately quoting you out of context so he can take a cheap shot at ATC’s. Make a note and check passenger manifests to see when he’s in a plane in your airspace next 😉
    Keep your chin up and don’t give up blogging or Twitter. “walk tall, speak straight and carry a big stick”.
    Remember, you have (at least) two Dutch guys watching your six.


    Comment by Evert Bopp — January 24, 2010 @ 4:13 pm

  14. Very irresponsible of the mail on Sunday, you definitely have a case against the gutter press.

    Comment by Barry Hand — January 24, 2010 @ 4:29 pm

  15. I’ve nothing really to add to this discussion but what an absolute scumbag for writing this article, particularly without your consent and permission to use your written material.

    Comment by Kevin — January 24, 2010 @ 4:30 pm

  16. Can you check out the Press Complaints Commission and see if the Mail on Sunday violated any laws? I haven’t read the article but if some comments were taken out of context and edited is it possible that can be construed as libel/defamation of character?

    The photograph thing is definitely illegal, the photographer owns the copyright unless it’s sold on.

    Comment by patsystone — January 24, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

  17. As a fellow blogger I have huge amounts of sympathy for you. Your reaction was completely understandable.
    However I am sure things are not as bad as they seem. I am sure the people you work with know, from knowing you, that you would never say things like that. I am sure their opinion will not change; even if it does so temporarily. Once you explain the whole thing I am sure it will all be ok.
    Your average person knows better than to believe everything they read in such a rag anyway.

    Comment by brickwithablog — January 24, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

  18. I’d agree with Rosemary. There may not be legal recourse, but there is almost certainly some recourse with regard to the photo, if one was sued (I haven’t seen the piece).
    Do write to the news editor and general editor. Such people do take these letters seriously.

    Comment by Adrian — January 24, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

  19. First thing to do, I think, is talk to a lawyer about what your rights are. I don’t think a journalist is obliged to tell you that he’s going to write about you, but I’m absolutely sure he’s not entitled to misrepresent you!

    As it sounds as if the article defames you and could potentially cost you money (such as not getting a future promotion because your employers think you’ve been disloyal, being rejected by a possible future employer, or even losing your current job if your position were to become untenable as a result of what you’re inaccurately alleged to have said), you could possibly have grounds for financial compensation.

    At the very least, I should imagine the newspaper owes you right of reply and a VERY handsome apology.

    Letting it go when you’ve had a chance to get over the shock of it is probably NOT a good idea – as you clearly realise, the fall-out from this could follow you, unjustly, for a long, long time to come.

    I do think that it’s vitally important that you get proper legal advice before you take any action whatsoever, though – a single consultation and a letter from a lawyer to the paper’s editor could well be enough to get the matter resolved to your satisfaction, and your expsenses should be included in any offer of compensation made to you by the newspaper.

    No-one should have to put up with being misrepresented, and I wish you every success in straightening this out.

    Comment by Aislinn O'Connor — January 24, 2010 @ 4:35 pm

  20. Melanie,

    So shocked to have logged on to see the turmoil that has broken out for you in the last few hours. This sounds like someone is a completely lazy journalist and you were an easy target. Little do they know the strength of spirit that they have now taken on as a result of writing this about you. The little I know about you I have a strong opinion that you are not the person depicted in this article so take strength now that your colleagues will also be of the same view.

    Don’t let this insensitive peice of literature get to you, in fact I wouldn’t even roll my chips in it.

    We are all here for you.

    Felicity and all at Buds.

    Comment by Felicity Brady — January 24, 2010 @ 4:57 pm

  21. Disgraceful conduct from Mail on Sunday, don’t let them away with it.

    Comment by Mick Nugent — January 24, 2010 @ 4:58 pm

  22. there has to be more control of the press. How can they justify trying to ruin a person’s reputation like this. This time they might have underestimated the support you have and they might have bitten off more than they can chew. We all support you as you can see already

    Comment by maryrelihan — January 24, 2010 @ 5:01 pm

  23. Unbelievable, scary low for journalism. Sorry you were taken out of context you have the right to request a correction.

    Just because you write a blog that is not free fodder! I guess it is a wake up call to bloggers (myself included) to make sure we have a copyright notice or creative commons licence on our blog. Good article here –

    Comment by Irish Mammy — January 24, 2010 @ 5:03 pm

  24. Melanie – That really is the pits but typical of the kind of gutter journalism that the Mail on Sunday breeds. I despair that otherwise intelligent people people read this sort of shit. You have been seriously wronged and while I am no lawyer I reckon you must have some recourse here. Your blog posting was totally twisted by the paper and manipulated to the point that what they printed was a lie. It is however part of a new trend where all the media seem to be scouring the social networks for soundbites – I was burnt last month when the Irish Catholic hoovered up one of my tweets and presented it as a public statement – lazy and disingenuous in the extreme! However your case is on another level – I am horrified at what has happened to you and I do hope that you get some justice here. That so called paper is not even fit to wrap up fish and chips!

    Comment by paddyanglican — January 24, 2010 @ 5:07 pm

  25. So sorry to hear about your experience. Don’t ask the internet for legal advice, ask a lawyer who’s an expert in libel.

    (The basic rule is that if you’re damaged in your reputation in such a way that it threatens your occupation, trade or profession, in the minds of reasonable people, you’ve been libelled. But ask a lawyer, and an expert one.)

    Comment by Pageturners — January 24, 2010 @ 5:15 pm

  26. Gutter journalism at it worst Melanie. It’s scary to even see this kind of thing make it to print. Blogs often get ‘abuse’ from print media as not being factual or properly researched. When a newspaper start fabricating stories from a selection of ‘quotes’ from a blog which are then reassembled to paint a completely different picture what does that say about it. You have my sympathies and support

    Comment by derryo — January 24, 2010 @ 5:17 pm

    Here’s a link to the Defamation Act, which came into force on January 1st. I’m not a lawyer, and what I say is based on advice I have received – it is accurate as far as I know but it would be best to get it verified by a professional.

    A defamatory statement is one which could lower your reputation among reasonable members of society (section 2). You say that this article (I haven’t seen it) has the potential to affect what others (your colleagues) think of you, so this piece may be in breach of the Act if that is the case. Section 6(3) says that the statement needs to reasonably be understood to refer to you – well, they’ve published your photo and everything! Section 6(5) says you can take a case without needing to prove you’ve suffered financial loss.

    If you want to avoid the drawn-out (and potentially expensive) hassle of trying to get damages, you can apply for a ‘declaratory order’ (section 28). This means the court will simply issue a statement declaring that the statement (i.e. the article) is false, and can order the publisher to print a retraction. Note that it is up to the publisher to prove the article is true, not up to you to prove that it is false. In other words, the article is presumed defamatory until proven otherwise.

    The publisher would be expected to defend themselves using section 20, particularly if you were seeking damages. This section allows the publisher to offer the defence that the opinion was honestly held. However, they have to show what the opinion was based on – section 20(b)(i) says it must be based on allegations of fact and that these facts must have been published within the statement (i.e. the article).

    This next part is a new feature of defamation law, so it remains to be seen how it plays out. But it would be expected that under section 22, damages would be reduced if there is an offer on the publisher’s part to make amends. The section outlines exactly what that means.

    That’s a quick run-down, and there are other relevant sections too. I haven’t seen the article, but based on what you’ve said above, I’d certainly be contacting a solicitor for some advice.

    If there’s anything you’d like clarified (subject to the usual ‘I’m not a lawyer’ disclaimer!), feel free to get in touch. Hope this is useful for you, and that your day begins to pick up a little bit 🙂 Take care.

    Comment by Alan Regan — January 24, 2010 @ 5:24 pm

  28. Melanie,

    I think a case could be made against the paper, as you didn’t agree to the article and there was no interview, that this article is career damaging and thus a case to sue. Even if you didn’t win the case, the bad publicity should be enough to scare the paper into an apology. Make a big fuss, go out fighting…don’t let them get you down. Go to the competition and sell the real story. Make them regret ever printing it.

    As for your blog, I could totally relate, I’ve gotten the secretary comments as well. And every new company or project with a few new men on it, I have to prove myself to someone. As for the organizing events/things all the time, just stop doing it. Keep the organizing to strictly job related tasks (because that in the end helps you out) but not in the social aspect. I refused to cook/bake or do anything traditionally female for the first 3 years I worked with mostly men just so they didn’t get used to it. In the end, the good out weighs the bad and I wouldn’t have it any other way.

    Good luck with it all.

    Comment by Kira — January 24, 2010 @ 5:27 pm

  29. that is just horrendous….don’t let them get away with with….give ’em hell….

    Comment by manuel — January 24, 2010 @ 5:35 pm

  30. I sympathise greatly. The worst aspects of British gutter journalism has unfortunately made it across the Irish sea via their ‘irish’ editions……

    Comment by Neil — January 24, 2010 @ 5:37 pm

  31. Melanie,

    Don’t know you from Adam, never heard of you before and have no idea what your thoughts are on the issues of the week in your profession but that is a fantastic post to write given the hurt that you must be feeling about being stiched up as you have.

    Comment by Padraig McKeon — January 24, 2010 @ 5:40 pm

  32. Melanie, shocked to hear what has been done to you. What a dignified and eloquent response you have written above in the circumstances. Walk tall, you have a lot of friends behind you.

    Comment by Gerry Mulvenna — January 24, 2010 @ 5:45 pm

  33. As a former journalist – with no regrets for my retirement in the light of your story – I am appalled by unprofessional work of this person and any self-respecting editor must take a serious look at his work and indeed his future with the publication. Unfortunately this type of “desk top journalism” seems to be the order of the day with tabloids, where the hack sits at a phone or computer screen and pieces together a story from morsels of information gleaned from sources other than his own. He/she then adds their own slant (usually salacious or downright scandalous) and passes it to his partner in crime, the subeditor, to write an equally scurrilous headline. And so it’s passed to an undiscerning readership to be slavered over with all the attention of a retarded goldfish before being consigned to the bin, where it should have been when spotted by the aforementioned editor.
    And so your colleagues, co-workers and best friends translated in tabloidese to “male chauvinist pigs”. Your humorous remark about being ribbed as “eye candy” became “institutionalised sexism” and the “banter” (about male stuff like rugby, golf and football, one could reasonably assume) emerged as “the most pervasive form of workplace sexism – filthy language”!
    There IS a more pervasive form of workplace nuisance – around the editorial office at any rate – and that is the slothful journalist with attitude who takes no pride in his work and no cognizance of the effect his unprofessional behaviour can have on those who cannot answer back. Hopefully there will be a vacancy at Mail newsdesk soon. I might even apply, on second thoughts, no, I have standards.

    Comment by Brian — January 24, 2010 @ 6:06 pm

  34. Sounds depressing. I can only advise going anonymous – which gives something of a buffer zone but I still feel nervous at times.

    I had a blog in my real name, and had an article published on a national political website, without my consent in the middle of a political “storm”. Fortunately the moment passed without any real embarrassment to me or the organisation I work for (and I’m now quite friendly with the editor who published it), but it pushed me into seeking legal advice from my organisation’s legal team, and I’ve been anonymous ever since.

    I still have to be careful though – it wouldn’t be too hard to track me down – so I never say anything defamatory – as I’m sure you didn’t.

    Now that we have twitter, blogs and Facebook we’re all in the spotlight some of the time, not just the stars.

    Comment by northernheckler — January 24, 2010 @ 6:18 pm

  35. […] reading “In response to Irish Mail on Sunday” I was disgusted. I’ve chatted with Melanie Schregardus on twitter, and I read her posts. I can […]

    Pingback by Liar Liar Your Pants Are On Fire Luke Byrne - People of NI - — January 24, 2010 @ 6:20 pm

  36. Mel,

    I am so sorry to see this has happened to a person like you by a person who has obviously not taken the time to even research their piece. Yet again another example of lazy journalism and by somebody who is letting down all the fine journalists in his profession. You have a huge amount of people behind you and I hope you take this as far as you can to get a full retraction of this trash for you and for other people who are let down by people who cannot be bothered to lift a phone or quote correctly and go by facts.

    We are all behind you,

    Comment by Sian Maloney — January 24, 2010 @ 6:24 pm

  37. Wow, that’s such bad form. Please do take them to task about it – there is no excuse for bad, lazy journalism.

    But then sadly this is what journalist appears to have become in Britain: sensationalism – nothing sells if it’s not OTT.

    I wish you the best of luck with this, please don’t be despondent. There are hordes of out there (on Twitter) rooting for you.

    Comment by LizUK — January 24, 2010 @ 6:52 pm

  38. I think when your colleagues and the rest of the world read what you’ve so elegantly written here, the damage will have been done not to them or us but to yourself and the Mail. The damage that has been done to you is unforgivable. Any damage the Mail do to themselves is always a good thing in my book. Bastards.

    Comment by Sophie — January 24, 2010 @ 7:17 pm

  39. Oh Mel I’m so sorry – that’s terrible!! Cannot believe they did that – get on to the editors immediately and demand an apology. And if there’s anything I can do, shout. Chin up, don’t let them get you down… xx

    Comment by chiarraigrrl — January 24, 2010 @ 7:21 pm

  40. Gosh< I didn't think it was possible for the Daily Used Piece of Toilet Paper to slip any lower. Guess I stand corrected. What a fecking cont of a journalist though huh. Lazy bastard. xx

    Comment by hammie — January 24, 2010 @ 7:57 pm

  41. […] You can also read Mel’s response on her blog here. […]

    Pingback by Its not all about the Pizza… » Blog Archive » Lies, Lies and more Lies! In Support of Mel. — January 24, 2010 @ 7:57 pm

  42. Absolutely not legal. I know someone who had something wrongly published about them (by the English Daily Mail as it happens I believe) and they took legal action against the paper. Ended in a sizeable out of court settlement in that case, but you can also demand (or the judge can) a public apology from the editor be posted prominently in the paper itself.

    I seriously and wholeheartedly recommend seeking legal advice on this matter.

    Comment by RealJIMMY — January 24, 2010 @ 7:59 pm

  43. Just came across this via. Twitter. I feel very deeply shocked by your treatment at the hands of someone totally undeserving of the description -‘human being’.

    It’s a very sad sign of the times that this has happened to you, and an indication of the type of ‘journalism’ the UK could be forced to succumb to in the future.

    take this ‘person’ to court, do him the same service he appears to have done you. With bells on, girl!

    Comment by lechant — January 24, 2010 @ 8:05 pm

  44. Well, you should have copy of the original blog post available both for your colleagues and your supervisors. The next step is civil court case against the newspaper for damaging yourself due to publishing an article not based on any facts and harming you, your colleagues and your employer. I would even think that your employer should use company solicitor to lead the case.

    Comment by Vlastik — January 24, 2010 @ 8:06 pm

  45. I haven’t read the your original post or the article in the Irish Times but I think this acts a reminder that what we write in the public domain can be twisted and changed. Not just on blogs but Twitter, and other social media networks.

    While my first instinct is to contact the newspaper for a full written apology but the damage as far as what has been published has been done.

    I would gather up all of the information and contact a solicitor, or at least some legal advice about what to do next. It’s journalists like this that should never be employed to write again.

    Comment by Darren Cronian — January 24, 2010 @ 8:24 pm

  46. I’m pretty confident you have a good case for legal action for defamation too. I wouldn’t go through with it. Just threaten it unless they issue a full apology in print. And… drop someone at the Guardian a line… they would love to run a counter story. (If that is you don’t mind this becoming a bigger story than it already is?)
    Good luck. As a journalist myself I’m just shocked at the shoddy way the writer has gone about writing this piece. Totally hideous and totally spineless too.

    Comment by Jeremy Head — January 24, 2010 @ 8:36 pm

  47. Mel, what happened is absolutely disgusting and shocking. I can understand very well how depressed you are feeling.
    But don’t forget an important thing: I am on your side, and lots of people are on your side.
    So, react! Don’t let them do that to you!
    I don’t know the English law, but I’m pretty convinced there’s something that can legally be done against the journalist and the newspaper.
    And, please, don’t let them wash their hands and clean their conscience with a private apology. The apologies and your real opinion must be public and have at least – if not more – the same evidence the newspaper gave to attack your reputation.
    A big hug!

    Comment by waitinginthedark — January 24, 2010 @ 8:52 pm

  48. get a solicitor- this is not fair. wishing you all the best, shayma

    Comment by shayma — January 24, 2010 @ 8:57 pm

  49. You have a case for defamation (libel) if you want to go down that road. As well as the apology, you probably want to get the article removed from the website and any databases.

    Comment by Caitlin @ Roaming Tales — January 24, 2010 @ 9:03 pm

  50. But you probably need your old blog posts so you can prove you were taken out of context and/or misquoted. I hope you took the blog offline rather than “deleting” it.

    Comment by Caitlin @ Roaming Tales — January 24, 2010 @ 9:03 pm

  51. Lets hope that the Peat Farmer is on holiday,that means there is a possibility that the only readers will be the staff of this Irish Rag. To all you ne’er do wells at The Irish Mail,’Get a Life’.

    Comment by Alf Welch — January 24, 2010 @ 9:43 pm

  52. Mel,
    Seek legal redress. It is the only option. The unfortunate state of affairs (re the on-going dispute) is being fuelled primarily by the media circus and has so many angles and vested interests at play the last thing you want is to be individually (ab)used in the middle of this mess. Being one of the few closest to this storm is enough sress already, I would imagine.

    Chin up but don’t take this crap, especially from the gutter press.

    Comment by Damian — January 24, 2010 @ 9:45 pm

  53. this is awful, i feel like deleting my blog and any other instance of myself off the internet, just in case this might happen. turns my stomach

    Comment by =Lam= — January 24, 2010 @ 9:50 pm

  54. Absolutely shocking… I can only imagine the sadness it has brought on you. Be strong.

    This writer is lacking in morals and just plain skills of journalism. Reflects poor on that newspaper. You didn’t even name and shame the writer. You win!

    I hope you have the chance to speak about this with your colleagues. Be sure that your colleagues need to hear your side, at least to know about your experience, and certainly to know the dangers of unscrupulous and crapulous writers in the tabloid trade.

    It’s nothing new to the tabloids- this is what they do.

    I think you should go the full nine with this and get back at them, and play on their turf. Anyway, their readers would sympathise with you quicker than aforementioned crapulous half-wit writer.

    Comment by heather — January 24, 2010 @ 9:52 pm

  55. 100% behind u. Media can be so ruthless.

    Comment by Joe — January 24, 2010 @ 10:05 pm

  56. Unbelievable! Actually, I am lost for words!!

    Comment by Rob of South Australia — January 24, 2010 @ 10:08 pm

  57. Cannot believe this!! Disgraceful, disgusting, appalling – that so called journalist should be ashamed and he and his editor should be fired. I can only agree with everyone else and advise you see what your rights are on this .. I’m SO sorry that you’ve had to deal with any of this, you so don’t not deserve any of this.

    Comment by Celine Blacow — January 24, 2010 @ 10:26 pm

  58. Definitely contact a solicitor.

    FYI, I suspect this applies:

    Comment by Tim Ireland — January 24, 2010 @ 10:56 pm

    I am dumbfounded Mel – how can this happen to one of the nicest people I have had the privilege of meeting.
    This is despicable!!!
    I truly hope you get Justice and a full retraction. Whatever about what was legal or illegal, this is character attack.
    I wish peace and fairness for you, you are in my thoughts tonight.
    Love & Light,
    E xx

    Comment by Elaine Rogers — January 24, 2010 @ 11:14 pm

  60. This is just awful I’m so sorry. You should definitely consult a solicitor. Nobody likes litigation but they deserve it.

    You have my complete sympathy.

    Comment by leftoutside — January 24, 2010 @ 11:18 pm

  61. Sorry now, but…
    You and your overpaid, overunionised, overstaffed mates did a massive amount of damage to this country last week. You should be ashamed.
    At basics – 300 people have a problem, so they mess up 20.000 others.
    I really wish that Cowen had the option – and the bolls – to do the Ronald Reagan and fire every one of you

    Comment by Freddo — January 24, 2010 @ 11:20 pm

    • Firstly what are bolls? Anyway this is about the way a good decent woman had some hack almost ruin her with a complete hatchet job. I actually believe you know this to be the case but decided to go against the grain because any rightful thinking person can see this for what it actually is.
      In the words of Tony Soprano “How do you like those apples”

      Comment by Tony Frattaroli — January 25, 2010 @ 12:05 am

      • Who is this person? This article and the defamation of Melanie has nothing to do with the strike of the air traffic controllers. It’s a journalist being lazy and stupid. I agree with your response Tony but maybe this person is just stupid?

        Comment by Maya — January 25, 2010 @ 1:03 am

  62. […] been rankling journalists, bloggers and tweeters for close on 11 hours. Melanie's words are here :…ail-on-sunday/ __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. […]

    Pingback by Gutter journalism Via the Mail on Sunday : Melanie Dawn taken out of context. - — January 24, 2010 @ 11:22 pm

  63. Sounds like you’ve strong grounds for civil action as well as BCC complaint.

    Also you could consider showing # of responses here to your TD… and mail the Irish Media about it, as privacy is a hot topic currently. Perhaps some PR guru might represent you pro bono (or you could agree to split share of any proceeds from civil action)

    Contact WordPress and get your deleted files back

    Also go hunting for the Google Cache of your previous posts, or see if they are in some Web/Internet Archive repository.

    Most importantly: contact your HR & Line Management in the morning, and devise a communication plan.

    Comment by Cyberianpan — January 24, 2010 @ 11:31 pm

  64. Melanie, I’m sure that your colleagues will understand when you explain to them. People understand that the Press are unreliable. I suggest you write a strong letter of complaint to the Editor, copy it to your boss and stick a copy up on the canteen wall. If you need a copy of your original blog post, if you search for it on Google, you should be able to find the cache copy of it, and attach it to your letter.
    I know how you feel, as my good name was besmirched by a lying blogger called dot, who is posting about your situation and pretends to care about it. Total brass neck, as she is happy to fabricate stories to rubbish other people. A total hypocrite.

    Good luck with your situation. It will come out all right.

    Comment by cactusflower — January 24, 2010 @ 11:41 pm

  65. Melanie, so sorry to see what’s happened here. Hope you’re ok. I would say I’m shocked but unfortunately I fail to be shocked by the press any more.

    Straight to a solicitor and get expert advice.

    I’m sure you’ll have full support from the lads in work – after the bashing we’ve all had this week, we all know how journalists these days deal in half-truths and distortions.

    I hardly believe a thing I read or hear in the media at this stage.

    Regret nothing in life. What’s happened has happened, don’t dwell on it and don’t let it get you down.

    By the way I’m shocked to hear that you all use bad language down there, I’ve never heard that sort of talk in EIDW 😉

    Concerned colleague

    Comment by lapmo — January 24, 2010 @ 11:50 pm

    • Thanks so much, my only concern is that my colleagues don’t believe I feel that way about them. From the calls today, I think they all feel the same way as you. Not looking forward to explaining this to management though.!

      As for the bad language .. we learned it from dublin Controllers 😛

      Appreciate the comment 🙂

      Comment by melaniedawn — January 24, 2010 @ 11:54 pm

      • Don’t worry about management. By the way check your fb inbox in a few minutes..

        Comment by lapmo — January 25, 2010 @ 12:08 am

  66. Just because something is unfair doesn’t mean you have any right or chance of redress. Those here advising you that you might be able to sue for defamation or obtain damages for use of your image are deluded. Even if you had the resources to take on a newspaper you have little chance of winning. You might fair better making a complaint to the ombudsman but even that’s doubtful.

    The lesson here is that as a blogger everything you write can and will be used against you by someone at some point, and yes, taken out of context, juxtaposed and twisted. It’s not fair but then that’s life.

    To anyone else thinking of blogging about work, employers, colleagues – present or past – openly and identifiably, my advice is simple: DON’T!

    Comment by mike power — January 25, 2010 @ 12:07 am

  67. Hang in there Melanie and don’t ever let the b*st*rds get you down. Plus all the other stuff above about getting a lawyer.

    Comment by Highlander — January 25, 2010 @ 12:10 am

  68. This has got the Daily Mail written all over it…

    Comment by Bertan Budak — January 25, 2010 @ 12:26 am

  69. Its disgusting! Journalists rehashing blogs and printing it as their own story ! shame on them !

    Comment by cliffsull — January 25, 2010 @ 1:12 am

  70. Oh. My. God. How embarrassing!


    Comment by letseatcake! — January 25, 2010 @ 1:19 am

  71. Dreadful stuff. Don’t – as they say – let the bastards get you down!

    Comment by BenSix — January 25, 2010 @ 2:07 am

  72. i probably wasn’t the only one to search for a trash title that i wouldn’t ordinarily even notice after the flurry of text messages from work folk this morning. after dredging through the fluff and casually stomping on the free copy of “hello” magazine which fell out, i put it back down after getting half way through the headline. it’s bad enough right now that our side of the argument isn’t being relayed coherently, never mind some twat trawling the internet to eventually skew your words for a cheap tale. keep the chin up, i’m sure i’m not the only one in eidw on your side.

    Comment by ic — January 25, 2010 @ 2:08 am

  73. You’ll be happy to know that the satirist, writer and all round cool guy, Al Moloney is on your side. He posted up a great little comic lampooning the hacks that pull this sort of crap:

    Comment by LemonBuddha — January 25, 2010 @ 2:53 am

  74. Run, do not walk, to your solicitor, and file an action. You deserve more than a retraction, you deserve an apology under the same size and placement of headline that the original article had–and quite possibly monetary damages as well. As a long time journalist, I know mistakes happen, but this sounds more like a deliberate distortion than a reporting error. The Mail should know better!

    Comment by Fred Gebhart — January 25, 2010 @ 5:17 am

  75. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ed Shahzade, Tim Ireland, Darragh Doyle, clarinette, clarinette and others. clarinette said: RT @mrs_bopp: @clarinette02 Thoughts? RT@brendanhughes: The Mail on Sunday should be ashamed: Via @darraghdoy … […]

    Pingback by Tweets that mention In response to Irish Mail on Sunday .. « MelanieDawn -- — January 25, 2010 @ 5:22 am

  76. Hi Melanie

    Saw the post on Twitter – journalism at it’s worst! I’d go with the other commenters on here and take him to court!

    Hope Mr Byrne is very proud of himself and his profession. Also hope that someone does the same hatchet job on him:

    Twitter: or @Lukezo

    And newspapers wonder why the are losing sales?

    Comment by Gordon Brown-Nose — January 25, 2010 @ 6:16 am

  77. good article…bravo !!

    Comment by mobil88 — January 25, 2010 @ 6:42 am

  78. Speak to Paul Tweed of Johnsons Solicitors (Belfast/Dublin). He is quite literally an international libel lawyer and should be able to advise you on whether you have a case against the Mail.

    Comment by John Self — January 25, 2010 @ 7:46 am

  79. This is outrageous behaviour from the Mail on Sunday, going far beyond lazy journalism. I’d echo what others have said and suggest you go to the PCC, also get a solicitor today and get in contact with them.
    Be aware the Mail may argue that everything you’ve written was in the public domain, but the fact that they have distorted what you’ve written, and published photos without your permission means you should still have a very strong case.

    Ironically, I came across this story via twitter.

    Take care and stay strong, I get the feeling a lot of your colleagues will be behind you.

    Comment by Sarah — January 25, 2010 @ 8:12 am

  80. Hi Mel,

    I found this post through Twitter. I am shocked by what you write. How can anyone take your words so out of context? There surely must be something you can do. I hope you are okay and will stay okay.
    Please let us know how things are going to turn out for you!

    *hugs* angelfrouk

    Comment by angelfrouk — January 25, 2010 @ 10:17 am

  81. I came across your story on Twitter, Melanie, and I’m really sorry to hear what has happened to you.

    I am appalled although not surprised. It is so sad when journalists can’t be bothered looking for a decent story to write about instead of resorting to this lazy and cruel mistreatment of people.


    Comment by Catherine Byrne — January 25, 2010 @ 10:19 am

  82. I was the victim of a similarly shoddy piece of third rate hack journalism last year. In this case it was the Mail on Sunday in the UK. The piece was then copied and slightly rejigged by the Independent and the Daily Telegraph, before finally finding itself syndicated all over the world via the internet.

    I took great delight in making a formal complaint in great detail. Raising point by point the breaches of the Press Code. I took satisfaction in the fact that the journo will have got a rocket for lying to his editor, and from using up a lot of the editor’s time (time that he otherwise would have spent inventing more bigoted invective).

    But it all took up time and caused me stress, so I know what you are going through. I did numerous radio and press interviews to set the record straight. These guys are scum, but I set it as my mission to cause them as much disruption as they caused me. I am not sure I succeded but it felt good trying. Don’t lie down and accept it – give the buggers a hard time.

    Good luck

    Comment by Gareth Kingston — January 25, 2010 @ 10:36 am

  83. Hi Melanie. A friend sent me your link and just wanted to say that I’m sorry to hear what has happened. A fairly similar thing happened to me with the Daily Mail here in the UK. I successfully took them to the PCC ( suggest that you do the equivalent in Ireland. It doesn’t wipe out what they’ve done – I don’t think I’ll ever get over the sickness I felt at 27 bloody inaccuracies, but getting them to apologise and clarify that they did indeed publish a load of doo doo, does go a long way. Whatever you do, don’t let what they’ve written twist what you think about yourself. You totally have cause for action – trust me, they’re very used to this sort of thing happens to them veeeeeerrrrry regularly. Take care.

    Comment by Natalie — January 25, 2010 @ 11:11 am

  84. Oh and don’t delete your blog – I was tempted to do the same but it actually acted as further proof.

    Comment by Natalie — January 25, 2010 @ 11:14 am

  85. Many things about this information age are poisonous.

    Deepest sympathies. Chin up.

    Comment by Mark — January 25, 2010 @ 11:47 am

  86. I’m so sorry. I have no advice to offer only support.

    I have seen journalists twist things like this before but it is always shocking. I hope the people you work with will understand. If they’ve ever had anything they do reported in the press, then I think they will.

    Comment by fairyhedgehog — January 25, 2010 @ 11:48 am

  87. See if you can find a Google Cache of the original blog post because that might be your only proof of what you really said. A search on Google for the post might do it, but be quick because it won’t be there for ever. Good luck.

    Comment by hugh fraser — January 25, 2010 @ 12:18 pm

  88. Speaking as somebody whose wife was done over by The Mirror ten years or so ago, you have my deepest sympathy. It’s not nice, I know.

    Comment by Nick Barnes — January 25, 2010 @ 12:59 pm

  89. Shocking, though I suppose that sort of thing is no better than you’d expect from “The Fail”, as a friend of mine calls them.

    I very much hope the whole thing is cleared up soon.

    Comment by Rock Hyrax — January 25, 2010 @ 1:16 pm

  90. […] copyright issue From the UK, Sally Whittle has this cautionary tale of an Irish air traffic controller blogger who had a post lifted (almost wholesale), it’s words taken out of context and reprinted as an […]

    Pingback by The copyright issue « Ed Lee's Blogging Me Blogging You — January 25, 2010 @ 1:20 pm

  91. I hope the support rallying around you helps a little. You have my support. Newspapers cannot be allowed get away this shoddy journalism.

    Comment by Greg Fry — January 25, 2010 @ 2:51 pm

  92. I agree, should have a word with the editor as it should be retracted. Are you on Twitter at all? ATC interests me as I used to take flying lessons and always fancied ATC as a career.

    Comment by DashCol — January 25, 2010 @ 2:58 pm

  93. TERRIBLE! I just got a workplace smack down as well due to a blog. The journal and “journalist” were out of line in your case. Blogs are a private (albeit in a public forum) format, the workplace should have no room punishing you for them – and newpapers should not be able to plagerize your work (it is YOURS afterall). Good luck getting this all sorted out!

    Comment by pdxlove — January 25, 2010 @ 3:48 pm

  94. Being accidentally misquoted is one thing (although still sloppy journalism): being wilfully misrepresented is another thing all together; the former can be resolved by a retraction and an apology; the latter by those responsible finding themselves on the business-end of a ruddy huge fine, legal fees and expenses!

    Take them the cleaners and, when you’re done, ask ’em “is my laundry ready yet?” 😉



    Comment by Cosmic Navel Lint — January 25, 2010 @ 4:17 pm

  95. […] don’t know Melanie Schregardus or her family very well, but I can only imagine the distress that they must have felt yesterday […]

    Pingback by Reflections on the Mail on Sunday article : John McGuirk — January 25, 2010 @ 4:42 pm

  96. Seriously, this is libel, and there are some firms that would probably be prepared to take it on on a no-win no-fee basis. I don’t know about Irish firms, but I believe there’s one called David Price & Co in England that works on this basis.

    Comment by Eleanor — January 25, 2010 @ 5:25 pm

  97. Ma-hay-jor Lawsuit! And English courts favors those slandered! Good luck on your new-found wealth!

    Comment by StayBank — January 25, 2010 @ 10:13 pm

  98. […] In response to Irish Mail on Sunday .. I deleted my blog this morning. I didn’t know what else to do. I was minding my own business when I got a call […] […]

    Pingback by Top Posts — — January 26, 2010 @ 12:01 am

  99. The professional communications podcast For Immediate Release covered this story. I’ve extracted the relevant portion in a blog post at where a podplayer lets you listen to the extracted audio right on the blog.

    Comment by Bernie Goldbach — January 26, 2010 @ 7:37 am

  100. Hold you head high and don’t back down one bit. Email your boss straight away, ask them to send an email to all your colleagues explaining your post and this twisted news article, include the fact that you have consulted legal help (ask your union for help too).

    Then get good legal advice on this. Did you breach any confidentiality in your original blog post etc. Your reputation is on the line and you need help to sort this out. Our comments of support are nice, a solicitor with expertise is better.


    Comment by Aaron Quigley — January 26, 2010 @ 12:45 pm

  101. You probably do have a case against them if a “reasonable person” would infer something damaging to your reputation from their article AND if you can clearly demonstrate how their interpretation of your blog post was willfully misleading and/or the reporting was unbalanced. A relation of mine had their career severely damaged by a few misleading newspaper articles and it’s something I’ll never forget nor forgive. Unfortunately, your blog fitted an agenda the journalist had and they have no moral qualms at all about the repercussions for you.

    Comment by Shane Dempsey — January 26, 2010 @ 2:16 pm

  102. Not only take legal action against the Mail, but go to the competition to announce it and have all the crassness of that illiterate rag and their half-assed journalists brought out into public. Use the spotlight they shun on you without consent to blind them, and show them up for what they are. Trash.

    Best of Luck

    Comment by C'est La Craic — January 26, 2010 @ 2:28 pm

  103. Taking your words out of context and using your face without consent does break laws, though not sure in Ireland. I’d totally listen to the above comments and get some legal help. This is totally out of line for any newspaper company!

    Comment by Mewski — January 26, 2010 @ 3:37 pm

  104. I haven’t read this Blog before, and only just found out about your situation, but you have to do something. This is wrong and you must be able to take some legal action, surely? Contact the newspaper, demand an immediate retraction, a LARGE retraction, and/or contact a solicitor. They can’t get away with this. I’m hoping that this all works out for you in the end.

    Comment by Amy — January 26, 2010 @ 3:40 pm

  105. I hate this. I hate everything about this. I’m studying Journalism at University and this makes me feel sick, it’s outrageous and disgusting.

    The majority of us are good, ethical people who are just doing a job, but it’s utter fiends like those wastes of oxygen at papers like the Mail that give us a bad name and make us less trustworthy to the public than *politicians*.

    Sue the crap out of them. Stand up to these lazy, libellous villainous ratfinks and hang them out to dry for what they have done not only to you, but to the reputation of every good Journalist in England.

    This must not be allowed to happen.

    Comment by James Eagle — January 26, 2010 @ 3:41 pm

  106. Here via Dara O’Briain on Twitter. I just want to add my voice of support to you. The Daily Heil did a very similar thing to some of my close colleagues last year, even hacking one woman’s Facebook and following another around taking photos of her & her baby. They are a bunch of low-life scumbags.

    You say you have a great relationship with your colleagues – I’m sure they will understand that your words have been taken out of context. Don’t let these spineless ****ers get you down!

    Comment by Rowan — January 26, 2010 @ 3:44 pm

  107. […] article was based, she later explained in a new post, on a blog item penned in November: [I] wrote a blogpost called “Women? In Air Traffic […]

    Pingback by Blogger seeks legal advice over Irish Mail on Sunday article | Editors' Blog — January 26, 2010 @ 3:45 pm

  108. Melanie,
    Something very similar happened to my dad when a paper published an interview with him in the aftermath of a local tragedy. He had never spoken to the journalist in question and all his answers were entirely fabricated.
    When he rang the paper he was told, “so sue us- we can afford a courtcase and you can’t. You have young children, even if you win you’ll lose your house.” they wouldn’t even publish a retraction.
    They shouldn’t be able to get away with it.

    Comment by Maire — January 26, 2010 @ 3:45 pm

  109. Melanie, I was able to read the cached capture of your post and saw nothing in your writing that seemed sensational. You were describing a situation as you experienced it years ago. This appropriation of your words and twisting them around to suit a point of view that is not your own, is scary. It is also one reason why I do not attach my full name to my blog. While a good reporter can dig long enough to find out who I am, I don’t wish to be OUT there in full view at all times.

    I hope this situation resolves itself and that your relationship with coworkers is not unduly affected. Meanwhile, I shall retweet your story, hoping to reverse some of the negative effects you have experienced

    Comment by Vic — January 26, 2010 @ 3:47 pm

  110. I just saw this link from Dara O’Briain’s twitter & am outraged for you – it’s completely ridiculous. A blog is supposed to be our private thoughts & opinions which we bear to the internet because we choose to in our own method. To have it twisted & forced into a newspaper article – especially for something as epically fail as the Mail on Sunday – is ridiculous to say the least. I urge you to pursue this legally, because it’s unacceptable, lazy journalism & puts you in a terrible position with your job – all without your knowledge. It misrepresents you in a public forum without your permission – I’d start kicking ass & taking names…now!

    Comment by Simon Hoodgkins — January 26, 2010 @ 3:51 pm

  111. We journalists are not all like this, I promise. It’s reporters like this who ruin the job for the rest of us, so on behalf of us decent ones (and we ARE out there), I apologise.
    I haven’t read the rest of the comments here, but go to the PCC –
    At the very least it’s publishing a photograph for which they don’t have copyright permission, but it could also be invasion of privacy and defamation – remember the defamation angle. The law says something is libellous if it defames or disparages someone in their profession or causes them to be shunned, ridiculed or avoided.
    Get a lawyer if necessary – it’ll be worth it. And don’t roll over and accept a three paragraph apology buried away on page 48.
    Good luck.

    Comment by Steve — January 26, 2010 @ 3:53 pm

  112. You need to see a solicitor. NOW. A friend recently had her entire life and reputation rubbished by the News of the World and took them to court. I can’t reveal details but they did to her what was done to you – found her blog, published information from it, twisted the facts.

    So sorry to read this. But this is the paper that still employs the evil Jan Moir after her attack on Stephen Gately just before his funeral.

    All the best to you. x

    Comment by Andy — January 26, 2010 @ 4:03 pm

  113. I’m not sure of the law in Ireland, but in the UK (talking as a Scot), you have defence of libel/defamation. The only time someone can’t defend this is when the journalist has used this as ‘fair comment’ in other words, that he/she can prove what they have published or that it’s in the public interest. The journo has simply read your blog and spliced the juicy comments to make the article a better read, in other words, false. So yes, you have the law on your side.

    Shockingly poor judgement/research from the journalist. This is lazy journalism, plain and simple. I’d love to know about his reasoning behind writing this.

    Comment by AndrewEllio — January 26, 2010 @ 4:09 pm

  114. Crikey – now I know why I never read the Mail!! Gosh, talk about sleazy, I guess they saw it as news cos of the recent action last Wed re air traffic controllers.
    Shocking stuff though, I feel so sorry for you, talk about an infringement of your privacy let alone making such blatant lies – and for what, to fill 2 pages in a paper.

    Comment by Lorna — January 26, 2010 @ 4:10 pm

  115. […] Mail on Sunday article which quoted her as saying that her workmates were sexist. Understandably, she’s not happy and claims that the Mail crossed its wires when unscrupulously lifting content and a photograph […]

    Pingback by The Digital Week « — January 26, 2010 @ 4:47 pm

  116. […] In response to Irish Mail on Sunday… "Maybe not giving me a right to respond is totally legal. Maybe not even telling me there was going to be an article is totally legal. Publishing my photograph without my knowledge or consent probably is totally legal. But I don’t know how it could be. I’ve never ever felt this low." (tags: journalism bloggers journalism,) […]

    Pingback by links for 2010-01-26 | Joanna Geary — January 26, 2010 @ 9:01 pm

  117. […] something on a blog under their real name and it is taken out of context and splashed across the Irish Mail on Sunday (hat tip Anton Vowl and Tim Ireland): The Mail never told me they were writing a piece about my […]

    Pingback by Blogging and Anonymity « Left Outside — January 26, 2010 @ 9:30 pm

  118. […] The above quote comes from the blog MelanieDawn. […]

    Pingback by Nerin Online - Bloggers Beware: A Scary Tale of Twisted Words — January 27, 2010 @ 7:18 pm

  119. […] publication of the article understandably caused Melanie some distress. She wrote: “In the middle of an incredibly trying time for my colleagues, an article has appeared in a […]

    Pingback by Another newspaper that doesn’t know copyright law or ethics | Online Journalism Blog — January 29, 2010 @ 7:34 am

  120. […] We reported earlier this week that air controller and blogger Melanie Schregardus had lodged a complaint with the Irish Mail on Sunday, after the newspaper ran an article about her last Sunday. Online users rushed to her defence, via Twitter and in the comments on her reinstated blog. […]

    Pingback by Irish Mail on Sunday responds to air controller blogger’s complaint | DAILYMAIL — January 29, 2010 @ 8:29 am

  121. […] Irish blogger and air traffic controller Melanie Schregardus has been the topic of much internet chatter this week, after the Irish Mail on Sunday printed a story based largely on a post she’d written on her blog. […]

    Pingback by Van Communications - PR, Creative Development, Media Relations, Crisis Management and Experiential — January 29, 2010 @ 5:08 pm

  122. […] she was not asked if she would like to comment on the story (read her full response to the article here) and worst of all they had even dredged up a picture of her from some far flung website and slapped […]

    Pingback by The Made Up News « That Surf Shop Guy — January 31, 2010 @ 6:30 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: