Disgraced Journalist & Editor Ben Naparstek of Fairfax Media Busted by Private Investigator. Ben is now affectionately called “Dalek” [Ref]

Search for Ben Naparstek’s other ethics whistleblowers


Ben Naparstek of SBS is a subject of intense scrutiny by licensed private investigator, after disclosure of serious breaches in editorial ethics.

Are you considering submitting to an interview with a Fairfax journalist who is working for Ben Naparstek?  Well, think twice.. Naparstek is Editor of the magazine Good Weekend which is inserted weekly into The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

UPDATE 09 July, 2014

A 124 page criminal warrant that was unsealed today which indicates Editor Ben Naparstek of Sydney Morning Herald may be participating in the following crimes in the USA: Ongoing Criminal Conduct, a Class “B” Felony (IOWA CODE § 706A.2); Conspiracy, a Class “D” Felony (IOWA CODE §706.1 ); Solicitation, a Class “D” Felony; Extortion (IOWA CODE § 705.1 ), a Class “D” Felony (IOWA CODE § 711.4); and Witness Tampering, an Aggravated Misdemeanor (IOWA Code§720.4), Facilitation of A Criminal Network By Attempting To Induce A Witness” commits a Class “B” Felony. IOWA CODE § 706A.2 (2013).

Download a copy of the warrant here.

Editorial Ethics Alert: Ben Naparstek Of Fairfax Media

PI exposes Ben Naparstek of Fairfax Media for serious ethical breaches

You might like to read this exposé which explains how one family suffered catastrophic damage to reputation, business, and personal relationships as a result of fallacious journalism on the part of a hatchet job journalist, flown into Australia by Ben Naparstek to do his dirty work. The brief account explains how the ‘journalist’ Daniel Glick and his Editor Ben Naparstek used numerous categories of logical fallacies, such as strawman, appeal to ignorance and ad hominem, to set up their victim, Michael Roberts (pictured right), and deceive their readers.  Presumably this was an attempt to embarrass competing  journalists from News Ltd,  who had been given the scoop and written sympathetic articles about the family. here, here, here, and the 60-Minutes story here.

It began with a dishonest pretext with the initial interview request to Roberts, who’s ex-wife attempted to murder him and is now serving a life sentence for murdering another man. Glick feigned a brotherhood type experience by explaining that his wife left him and his children to pursue a lesbian relationship. It is unknown if this pretext is true or false, but it was a deplorable pretext used to ingratiate himself with the Roberts’ family. Glick even ate Michael’s daughter’s birthday cake…

Many of the facts used by Naparstek and Glick were in and of themselves benign, but by peppering their final story with a convoluted web of lies and twisted half-truths leaves reasonable readers unable to draw accurate conclusions (argument through verbosity).

Journalist Tim Andrews recently alleged that Ben Naparstek killed a story by Jana Wendt, (of 60-Minutes Fame), on another journalist Andrew Bolt. Apparently the story was killed because it wasn’t a hatchet job. Tim Andrews then revealed how the exact same thing happened to him; Ben Naparstek apparently flew in a London based journalist named Rachel Hills, for whom Tim had dedicated a few weeks of his life to make sure that she wouldn’t get elected to the student union when they were at uni together… This would make it understandable as to why Ben Naparstek commissioned Rachel to write a profile piece on Tim. (read full account)

Interestingly, Ben Naparstek and Fairfax Media flew disgraced author & journalist Daniel Glick from the United States of Entertainment to interview Roberts; just like Tim’s case, Roberts is an Aussie, in Australia and the story was for an Australian newspaper. This is despite the availability in both cases of numerous Australian journalists who did not need travel expenses. Maybe this fact evidences an ethical divide between journalists on either side of the Pacific? Either way, let’s be careful not to commit a hasty generalization which is one of many logical fallacies employed by Naparstek & Glick in their recent attack piece against Roberts.

counter on blogger