Catherine Deveny has written at the ABC's Unleashed site about her sacking from The Age. I posted a reply, but if anyone would like to read it without wading through the 600 other comments, this is what I wrote:
That was rather moving in places between the self-justification. I think you're still missing a few points though.
You can't claim to be taken out of context on Twitter. The whole point of Twitter is that there is no context. You can't expect someone casually following the #logies tag to automatically know your back-story with Rove. All they see is someone making what seems to be a really tasteless joke. Personally, I didn't have a problem with the Bindi comment. I saw where you were coming from with that but again, thousands following the tag wouldn't. I can think of several other commentators who could have gotten away with it, since they don't already have such a history of trash talk.
As you said, "True sentiments are lost in Twitter." If you knew that and chose to take your chances anyway, then you have to accept what happens next. Freedom of expression doesn't mean immunity from blowback. If you'd chosen to show some contrition and admit that you'd made an error in judgement, I expect you'd still be on the payroll at The Age. If you choose to stand by it all, citing the "I'm edgy, me," defence - if you really think that's a fight worth fighting, worth losing a gig that thousands would give their left nipple for, then good luck to you. I guess Miranda Devine chose differently.
There's nothing wrong with admitting you pushed the envelope too far and saying you're sorry. Refusing to admit mistakes and blaming everyone else? That's such a guy thing!
The other thing is, it's a bit rich to look for compassion a couple of weeks after calling soldiers greedy and racist. I'm sorry you're heartbroken. I imagine there would be a few diggers and their families who are heartbroken over what you said about them without knowing them. But as you said at the time, fuck respect. You get what you give.