Personally, when a controversy erupts, we decide first whether it requires clarification and, secondly, if it receives notice from authorities and the establishment, we submit responses to their queries.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
My intention... isn't to create controversy.
If you want to do stuff, you have to be able to handle controversy.
In politics, the reaction to a controversy is very often more enlightening and important than the details of the allegations themselves.
Despite my involvement in difficult and sometimes controversial questions I have received consistent support from the people of Ashfield. They have recognised that it is necessary to take difficult decisions, that newspapers do not always report fairly or accurately.
The greater the controversy, the more you need manners.
Whenever you're reporting, there's always something you can't say or write, but the questions, you always want to get as close to that line as possible. You want to ask the tough questions.
Frequently the more trifling the subject, the more animated and protracted the discussion.
All we do is bring the debate from both sides, and let you as a viewer decide where you want to end up on the issue. That's very important. That's exactly what happens in 'Redemption Inc.'
If you create something that is asking for people to respond as they're going to respond, you have to allow them to respond as they're going to respond. Some of the people are going to be uninterested and some people are going to be mad for some reason, which is their business. That's just the way the world is.
If you get involved in a controversy, then that becomes the mesmerizing event that people remember you by.