As a former ABC producer-presenter on religion for 26 years, the advent of Twitter in 2006 presented a serious editorial issue. On the one hand, the ABC was initially quite positive about the potential to broaden its appeal through social media, making its presenters more popular and engaged with a wider audience. Workshops were organised instructing us how best to implement this new media tool. The hope was that the 140, later expanded to 280, character comments of presenters would entice readers to become ABC listeners. It was all about boosting numbers.
But social media quickly became an embarrassment when presenters shared views that contravened the express instruction from editors to steer clear from ‘opinion’ that undermined the journalist credo to remain impartial. Cautionary warnings were issued, and the problem of expressing bias was ‘solved’ by some presenters restricting their posts to links to articles written by others in the media world. This tactic was, however, just a subterfuge. Pick your sources, pass them on uncritically, and you have in effect expressed your bias.
Such partly explains the case of Ms Lattouf who, regarding Israel’s war in Gaza, uncritically posted that Human Rights Watch reported that Israel was using starvation as a method of warfare, which is a war crime. Citing United Nations Human Rights Watch, which has a long history of condemning Israel on all matters to do with Palestinians, is not good journalism, it is just passing on the prejudices of a highly anti-Israel body and is therefore riddled with problems of bias. Not least of which, it omitted to mention that 11 days after October 7, Israel agreed to allow humanitarian aid to enter Gaza via Egypt. That Hamas has been photographed overtaking supplies and taking them to their own storage facilities to sell them on has been acknowledged by Gazans themselves.
Ms Lattouf defended her posts as reporting ‘fact,’ but as we know the job of the journalist is to see and report all the facts, not just those that fit a particular narrative. It has long been a tactic of pro-Palestinian protesters to play the hapless victim of Israel, ignoring, in this case, the massive amount of products, food, jobs and services that Israel has provided to Gaza since 2007, and remain blind and mute to the travesties perpetrated by Palestinians, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad. These same anti-Israel protesters, whether on the streets, in the papers, or on air, consider the barbarous actions of October 7, like the many acts of terrorism over Israel’s 75-year modern history, as legitimate acts of ‘resistance’. Terrorism is thus emptied of its meaning, and the over 1,200 murdered and the last of the 253 hostages taken from a music festival and from their homes on October 7, languish in tunnels, forgotten.
The most alarming aspect of the case of Ms Lattouf and the ABC is that the legitimate reaction of the listening public to this fill-in talk-show presenter’s unchecked comments was deemed the actions of a ‘campaign’ of the Jewish lobby. When do listeners who react negatively to distortion and bias get classed as a ‘lobby’ – a term that implies the organised wielding of political power? Would there ever be a subject to which Jewish Australians react with concerted agreement that is not now labelled a (powerful) ‘lobby’? Is not the use of this term the snidest way to dismiss Jewish Australians’ legitimate concerns?
The truth about the ABC’s claim to impartiality is that it has never been fully achieved or even to a large extent approximated. Because it often defends its views as an ‘antidote’ to conservative TV and radio media, it is always comfortable taking the left-of-centre position on any subject in the name of ‘balance’. Today, that shallow view of journalism, where truth is ignored in a sea of opinion, and in which the practitioners simply quote other journalists who show no deep knowledge of the subjects they purport to comment on, has become the modus operandi.
But more worrying is that ‘the left of centre’ has now adopted a raft of positions more reflective of the Woke agenda of anti-colonialism, anti-white, anti-West, anti-religious, antisemitic, and most especially anti-Israel posture, which is ironic in the extreme, given Israel is an inclusive, free, and vibrant democracy, fighting for its life against religious and political authoritarian regimes which are bent on eliminating it.
It appears that the ABC was engaged in a rear-guard action with Ms Lattouf, which was too little, too late. The horse had left the stable, as it were. The idea of the public broadcaster as demonstrating the highest standard of journalism based on informed research and impartial reporting was already undermined by a culture that increasingly permitted, even encouraged, opinionated presenters and accepted that they would have Instagram accounts on which they expressed dubious opinions. But unfortunately, to use another barnyard metaphor, the chickens came home to roost, and it cost Aunty plenty. The question remains for Jewish Australians, will it change anything for the better in its reporting on Israel.
