MUF in a recent media release said that “ It could have avoided the public controversy over the voting discrepancies that occurred on the night of the event, if it to was happy to overlook the event organiser stacking judges, to ensure his client won.
To avoid such controversy MUF could have simply ignored the voting discrepancies raised on the night, and swept the vote rigging by the event organiser to ensure a Fiji Indian contestant won, and the client he manages for potential Global sponsorship deals.
However it believes firmly in ethics and transparency,and if we continue as a society to turn a blind eye to vote rigging, and unethical behaviour, then we are supporting, encouraging and endorsing such behaviour.
Somewhat like the BBC, who struggle to tell the truth about anything these days, and is happy to not only endorse the event organisers dishonest behaviour, but to smear others to deflect,and hopefully distract its readers from the event organisers vote stacking.
Media outlets should be reminded the public expects such events to be reported accurately.
Suggesting the party that appointed almost all judges, none of who were independent, but all family, friends, associates and business partner and denied the one licensee vote,to ensure the contestant they wanted to win was announced on the night of the event, without authority to select judges or choose the winner, which turns out to be his client he is managing, and hopes to profit from for Global Sponsorship deals, is somehow the innocent party is ludicrous and appalling journalism.
To only interview non independent judges and only take the word of the disgraced and terminated event organisers word,is equally questionable behaviour by the BBC.
Any real journalist could easily de bunk the event organisers and BBC conspiracy theory that the licensee wanted to choose Nadine Roberts as the winner due to an associated company shareholder once being in a relationship with here.
If that conspiracy is true.
Then why didn’t the licensee simply select all all judges, and ensure no judge was independent, and enough judges must be persuaded to vote for their preferred contestant, just like the event organiser did? ( it’s not like the event organiser can’t figure out 4 out of 7 judges is all that was needed to get his client announced as the winner )
Or the licensee also could have not held a contest at all, saves the expense and time, and simply nominated the most experienced candidate to represent Fiji at Miss Universe, which is common in many smaller countries for large beauty pageants.
Yet it did neither. Such a conspiracy is without merit and any serious journalistic organisation would quickly identify such an anomaly and cease publishing such false narratives.
No amount of media campaigning by the event organiser to media outlets, and MO,will change the facts and the cause of the unnecessary controversy. MUF will consider seeking injunctive relief to ensure the right full winner attends Mexico for the finals, not a contestant because she’s managed by an event organiser feathering his own next and thinking vote stacking is perfectly ok and engaging in a desperate media smear campaign with some media outlets desperate for readers willing to endorse and support his behaviour.
Any media outlets who continue to print false narrative such as the BBC, re what occurred during Miss Universe Fiji will also be held to account.
In the times of fake news we would expect mainstream media to start considering stating the truth, as something the public would expect,
as hard as it seems for some outlets such as the BBC.”
For More info, Visit Press Release:
https://missuniversefiji.org/press-release/