said by DKS:Conditional on the family not launching a lawsuit?
Maybe, but there's a lot more to suggest that it's self-serving. They've had a moratorium on commercials for a few days, and are now saying, come on back, advertisers, and the proceeds will go to the family. Attract advertisers back and rehabilitate their image all at the same time!
The radio station is doing what a business does -- they are being a business.
My only problem with your surprisingly intemperate assessment of the DJ's guilt on this -- and I've agreed throughout this discussion that they're a couple of jerks -- is that justice must be tempered and reasonable and consider the circumstances. The court of public opinion here is to throw them under the bus. The evidence suggests that they never intended for the prank to actually work (would you really have someone pretending to bark like a dog in the background and the Queen saying something about feeding her Corgis if they seriously wanted to get through and get information from the hospital?). And IMHO, the evidence also suggests that the DJ's are genuinely shocked and remorseful, which is not necessarily inconsistent with the fact that they probably are also a couple of jerks, and their employer apparently even worse. Life is rarely simple, and simple retribution is not always the best remedy.
