Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch Dane Swan (Retired 2016)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shade
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

His identity would have been obvious and very public the minute the video was uploaded. Lets not blame the media here.

Nup. I don't think thats true. And I also don't think that is any sort of excuse for the media.

It would've been disemminated or discussed with a very small portion of the population on sites like this. I don't know if it was posted on instagram/twitter/snapchat/facebook/reddit - but anyone doing so would not only have breached the guidelines of those sites but would also have broken the law.

99% of people would barely have heard about it until the article was posted - then suddenly people start to asking questions about who it was - that would spark a heap of interest and people looking for the video and talking about it, and then when you release the name that just gets even worse.

The media are ****ing irresponsible and are very rarely ever held to account for shit like this.
 
But it shouldn't be news, and IMO he should be allowed to sue whichever media company released his name.

Two separate concepts here. I agree it shouldnt be news. I'm precisely zero percent surprised it is news. I'm also intrigued as to what cause of action you think he could, or should, have that couldnt be used by the powerful and the wealthy to shut down legitimate reportage.

What gives the media the right to then further breach his privacy? This is bullshit and the media need to be held account.
If this was an 18yo girl who was a victim of revenge pr0n (which this is) and the media blasted her name and face all over the news without her consent - they would be (rightly) ripped to shreds.
Just coz this is a 30yo man who happens to have played footy they are allowed to disclose who it was? What a load of shit.

Like for example when the Herald Sun published the name of one of the complainants in the Robert Doyle case, including deliberately revealing photos designed to paint her in a bad light, in a carefully orchestrated campaign by Doyle's mates to smear the woman, and everyone said precisely nothing?

I mean, I get what you are saying, but I'm struggling to paint a high profile footballer with significant resources who clearly knew what he was doing as a totally blameless or vulnerable victim here.

If our media are off the reservation, they parted company with the road a long long time ago and far far worse than this.
 
Two separate concepts here. I agree it shouldnt be news. I'm precisely zero percent surprised it is news. I'm also intrigued as to what cause of action you think he could, or should, have that couldnt be used by the powerful and the wealthy to shut down legitimate reportage.



Like for example when the Herald Sun published the name of one of the complainants in the Robert Doyle case, including deliberately revealing photos designed to paint her in a bad light, in a carefully orchestrated campaign by Doyle's mates to smear the woman, and everyone said precisely nothing?

I mean, I get what you are saying, but I'm struggling to paint a high profile footballer with significant resources who clearly knew what he was doing as a totally blameless or vulnerable victim here.

If our media are off the reservation, they parted company with the road a long long time ago and far far worse than this.

I agree with all of that, and I'm not saying any of this surprises me - just saying it is disappointing and they should be held accountable.

The difference here (to your first example of the powerful and wealthy - not to the Doyle case) is that he is the victim, and precisely the victim of his privacy being breached.
He never went to the media. There is no allegation whatsover that he has done anything against the law, or anything that should be of particular consequence to the australian public.
If he went to the media himself, then feel free to discuss it. If the allegation is that he broke the law by distributing it, then it is worth the media's attention and he should face the consequences of that.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I agree with all of that, and I'm not saying any of this surprises me - just saying it is disappointing and they should be held accountable.

We still buy them. We still click on their links. Like politicians, I firmly believe we get the media we deserve. When I look at our public life as a society at the moment, I see malaise across the board, this is a symptom not the disease.

Unimpressed horse is unimpressed.

361c50e68537be0ade5589a7e41f1c14--horse-face-free-icon.jpg
 
I have no interest in this at all and I think it's terrible. But just out of curiosity, if one was to be interested in taking a look at said questionable video, how would one go about finding it?

enhanced-21936-1446152913-1.jpg
 
A lot of thirsty dudes wanting to see Swannys junk ITT.

As a bisexual dude I am gratified at the sheer depth and breadth of rampant yet somehow un-reflective homoeroticism on show. Makes me feel something, I am just not sure what.
 
So an old video circulated now. Media name Swan eventhough a victim....Basil Zemplis please, what a knob you are.
 
A lot of thirsty dudes wanting to see Swannys junk ITT.
It’s pretty gross isn’t it? I guess that’s why there is a market for this. Personally I’d rather just watch the footy.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Is there any suggestion that he posted the video? And was it without her consent? (In which case he deserves the serious legal consequences)

If he was not involved in the spreading of it then he's done nothing wrong. (If his partner wants to leave him thats up to her, but nothing we should particularly care about)
Apparently it was not posted by him and it has been posted without his consent.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

[mod edit]Folks, the mods are invoking rule #4 of the BigFooty Terms and Conditions here.

That means please do not post requests for any links to the video being discussed, thanks[/mod edit]


Swan and his manager have both released statements. Pickering’s is particularly worth keeping in mind; we may not have heard the last on this.

“Swan” said:
“I have recently become aware of a video of me being published and circulated on the internet,” he said. “Contrary to some media reports, the video is not a ‘sex tape’.

“Although the video was taken a long time ago, it has been posted and distributed only recently. It was taken and distributed without my consent. The distribution is a gross breach of my privacy.

“As it is illegal to distribute such material online without consent I have reported the matter to the police who are investigating the distribution.

“As the matter is under investigation, I have no further comment at this time and I ask that my privacy be respected.”

“Pickering” said:
“In other incidents often with a female victim the media has been keen to protect the victim’s identity. Although Dane understands he is a public figure, he is the victim in this case and is no less deserving of that protection.

“There is a double standard where the media feels free to name him and engage in a feeding frenzy of commentary and speculation about the circumstances, rather than allow him the privacy that any victim in such circumstances is entitled to have.

“The media do not know the circumstances and we will take action against anyone who speculates unfairly about them.”
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Few thoughts:

1) I suspect Swanny's issue is the fact that he's busted publicly cheating on his mrs. (unless it's a video from before he was with her?)

2) Who the hell would want to see Dane Swan have sex with anyone? Chris Tarrant? Sure. Alex Rance? Yeah. But Swan? Ew.

3) Why now?

4) If this is recent, how is Swan dumb enough to record or let anyone record him screwing them. Like seriously.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom