SMH

Professor Spurr could not be reached for comment

The University of Sydney said it would not tolerate racist, sexist or offensive language.

“The university is deeply disturbed by reports offensive emails were sent by a member of its academic staff from a university account,” it said in a statement late on Thursday.

“The university takes the allegations very seriously and is examining whether any breaches of its code of conduct have occurred. This code clearly sets out the university’s expectations for our staff and affiliates in respect of their professional and personal conduct.

“In particular the code requires that members of staff ‘act fairly and reasonably, and treat [people] with respect, impartiality, courtesy and sensitivity’.”

New Matilda said Spurr sent the emails to about a dozen people, including academics and officials at the University of Sydney, between September 2012 and late 2014.

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/16/curriculum-review-expert-investigated-over-rac...

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@karliandjacko wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@debra9275 wrote:

Good becasue  it does not say  any computer was hacked, it's only your assumption then

---

So "unauthorised access" is OK by you is it?

---

Sometimes it is ok.

---

Like it's ok if someone comes and uses your computer without your permission and take your personal information and publishes it that would be ok with you would it?

---

Note, the sometimes.  No, it would not be ok for someone to publish the contents of my peersonal computer. Computers owned by the workplace are a different matter. There are policies about their use and the employer, not user, owns them.  

 

The information in question was on a work computer which was being used to communicate with others in the workplace.  The comments were not acceptable in the work place context.  They were shared in the workplace and not, as you said, on a personal computer using a personal email account.

I have a relative who was a public servant, and I once sent him a very mild risque joke.  Even though no-one else would have seen it, he was required to send me a long spiel about "not acceptable content" emails on government computers.

---

@am*3 wrote:

Pretty obvious Mia owns her own BLOG ( not an independent news site)

New Matilda have stated they have done nothing illegal in publishing Barry Spurr's emails.

---

 

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:

Pretty obvious Mia owns her own BLOG ( not an independent news site)

New Matilda have stated they have done nothing illegal in publishing Barry Spurr's emails.

---

 

"My lawyer informs me that accessing my email is 'a criminal offence' and the university's security service is currently looking into the matter," Professor Spurr told the website.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/barry-spurr-emails-investigated-by-university-of-sydney-20141016-1179kj.ht...

 

Am*3: "New Matilda have stated they have done nothing illegal in publishing Barry Spurr's emails."

 

That's not the same as not doing anything wrong. It's still a witch hunt.

---

Considering he was employed for a review into education and considering most parents would like their kids to not grow up to be nasty bigoted people who take pleasure from being arrogant, rude and hurtful to others, it is very wrong.  He was a poor choice to work on anything involved with children's education.  He is obviously a prejudiced buffoon who should be nowhere near the curriculum.

there are a couple of articles about this toad on New Matilda, he is really, really disgusting - so bad that it is not fit for cs.  

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:

Pretty obvious Mia owns her own BLOG ( not an independent news site)

New Matilda have stated they have done nothing illegal in publishing Barry Spurr's emails.

---

 

"My lawyer informs me that accessing my email is 'a criminal offence' and the university's security service is currently looking into the matter," Professor Spurr told the website.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/barry-spurr-emails-investigated-by-university-of-sydney-20141016-1179kj.ht...

 

Am*3: "New Matilda have stated they have done nothing illegal in publishing Barry Spurr's emails."

 

That's not the same as not doing anything wrong. It's still a witch hunt.

---

No, it is not a witch hunt. It is exposing a person who has very recently had input into the National Curriculum (English) and who uses his work email address (University of Sydney) to send racist/offensive content.

 

 

This is not a matter of one email - a momentray slip in judgement - there were many and sent over a period of two years. Sent by work email address.

 

It is in the public interest to publish such information.

"a witch hunt"..what a laugh. No witch hunting going on but certainly a disgusting creature has been exposed - how anyone can defend this "person" is beyond me, even if there is a minority of people who might agree, most wouldn't admit it publicly. What he said about a women who had been a victim of serious sexual assault is shocking, who could agree with this kind of stuff in modern Australia? Hope he is sacked.