News
The dangers of e-mail
Have you noticed how, in recent years, we have become obsessed with the little things in life?
Thirty years ago, the types of things that interested us were sitcoms about the Korean war, missile crises or major international sporting events.
Not so any more. If TV ratings are anything to go by, we are fascinated by the mundane details of a pop star's marriage - or obsessed with the voyeuristic pleasures of another season of Big Brother.
Perhaps that is why we seem to be so interested in seemingly irrelevant events in anonymous people's lives. And perhaps part of is because the internet - and our work email systems - allow such news to be spread so quickly.
Over the last three weeks, you may have been forwarded an email which originated from a Sydney law firm. The story behind this e-mail is both tragic for the people involved - and a sore reminder to all of us to be careful about how we use our e-mail systems.
Katrina Nugent was a secretary at Allens Arthur Robinson in Sydney. She sent a group e-mail to her colleagues asking if someone had stolen her lunch.
"Yesterday I put my lunch in the fridge on level 19 which included a packet of ham, some cheese slices and two slices of bread which was going to be for my lunch today", Nugent wrote. "Overnight it has gone missing and as I have no spare money to buy another lunch today, I would appreciate being reimbursed for it".
Another secretary, Melinda Bird, wrote back. Bird had been relocated out of Nugent's group - but still received the email that she sent. Bird suggested that Nugent might have left her lunch on a different floor - suggesting that she may have (stupidly) misplaced her food.
And that is when the fighting talk began.
Nugent taunted Bird for being blonde. Bird replied "being a brunette doesn't mean you're smart". Not to be outdone, Nugent told Bird that she wouldn't trade places with her "for the world". Bird agreed, commenting that she was glad not to have Nugent's figure.
There was then an argument between the women about which of them received the higher pay packet, and who had been more successful with men (with success apparently being gauged at least in part by quantity).
At that point, it appears that Bird forwarded the e-mail string to a number of her colleagues (which seemed to have included one or more solicitors). Instead of keeping the correspondence to themselves, those people then forwarded the e-mail to their friends and colleagues in other organisations.
And then the fun began.
Within 24 hours, the e-mail string had been forwarded all around the world – and had been posted on numerous internet sites. Within a day, therefore, literally hundreds of thousands of people (if not millions) had seen this e-mail correspondence - and as its legend grew, more people sought it out.
Within only a few days of the original email, the saga of the missing lunch - and the apparent cat fight that followed - made it to the pages of the Australian daily newspapers.
Needless to say, this entire episode was something of an embarrassment for the employer. It took disciplinary action, dismissing the two secretaries from their jobs - and apparently taking action against those others who were responsible for dispersing the e-mail outside of the firm. Put simply, all had acted to bring their employer into disrepute - through what amounted to misuse of the e-mail system.
On one level, you would be forgiven for asking why it is that a seemingly irrelevant spat about a missing lunch - and a rather unfortunate terse exchange between two administrative staff - could provide such interest and amusement to thousands of people. That is, one supposes, simply a comment about the state of our society - and the magic of the internet.
On another level, the moral of the story is simple: anything you say or do over the internet (and particularly through your work e-mail system) is capable of being forwarded and read by millions.
In this case, there is little doubt these employees ended up paying a high price for such a seemingly trivial tiff. This story is a reminder to all employees that severe consequences may follow where an unfortunate e-mail goes wrong.
Even if it is only about a missing ham sandwich.
