The ABC has a new Chair, Kim Williams, who takes up the role at an especially tumultuous time for the main national broadcaster.
Amongst the many issues that have been surfaced – or resurfaced – by the decision to terminate Antoinette Lattouf a mere two days before her contract was due to end is whether ABC staff who come from diverse backgrounds are capable of meeting the level of impartiality required by the ABC, when they report on their own communities.
Kim Williams isn’t yet in the hot seat but has already been asked whether objectivity and diversity are at odds with each other – and his response appeared to back the affirmative view of former Media Watch presenter Jonathan Holmes who first raised the issue. Williams said it was 'complex'. Not so for ABC Managing Director David Anderson who told Radio National Breakfast that a journalist’s cultural background has no impact on his or her ability to be impartial. 'We all hold our own backgrounds, our own lived experience - no matter what that might be – geographical, socio economic, political, culturally diverse – I believe people act impartially at the ABC and I believe they do so regardless of that,' he said. Cue many interesting discussions ahead around the ABC Board room table.
Of course, the question – can journalists of diverse background impartially report on their own communities – carries problematic assumptions. The first is that diverse journalists have diminished or no capacity for impartiality and the second, that white journalists from the dominant culture reporting on their own and other communities are somehow, miraculously more able to be impartial. Anderson’s response was probably the only answer he could give to stem the outrage within the ABC that diverse journalists are feeling unsupported and rounded upon, especially in relation to coverage of the Gaza/Israel war.
That's not to say that asking the question is inappropriate or that it is asserting the journalism produced by diverse background reporters at the ABC on issues such as The Voice, marriage equality or Gaza/Israel has been anything other than impartial. The ABC’s number one KPI ought to be trust and there is an often-expressed concern that objectivity at the ABC is a problem which has created a trust deficit. Worse, it is often diverse background reporters who have the blame finger pointed at them.
The ABC often defends accusations of bias by pointing to its editorial policies which demand open minded enquiry in which the truth, or the closest approximation to the truth, comes from the evidence that in most cases derives from responses to questions asked of many, without agenda. Supporters of advocacy journalism, including many of whom signed the petition Derek mentioned above, calling for 'both sidism' in the reporting of Gaza/Israel to be abandoned, would say this 'outsiders' journalism is impossible to achieve. It’s undoubtedly hard. But the alternative is the airing of prejudices without enquiry.
Ultimately, if journalists are using open minded enquiry, there can be no substance to claims that diverse background reporters are allowing advocacy to intrude on journalism. And it may well be that open enquiry leads to the same conclusions as that espoused by advocates which is ok because it will be evidence based, factually accurate, fair and independent reporting. It’s reasonable to ask the ABC to verify whether this is what its journalists are producing. If the answer is still 'all good here', tell the lobbyists (both Israeli and Palestinian) who come at it with complaints that they should go talk to the ABC ombudsman. And put protocols in place to ensure that diverse background journalists who find it hard to report on their own using the methods required are not asked to do so when it’s impossible for them.
Monica Attard, CMT Co-Director
This is from our Centre for Media Transition newsletter: Lattouf dispute, objectivity and the AI race - Issue 1/2024. Read it here.