The ABC, Arbiter of its Own Truths

Some criticism of ABCTV is wordless. News Director Justin Stevens checked a voicemail 20 years ago, when he was assisting the 7.30 Report by logging the overnight feedback. The caller held his phone above the toilet and pushed the flush button. My more recent complaint was about ABCTV’s flagship 7pm News. I went to some wordy length on the official form. Here’s the story.

For Sunday dinner, my marital chef presented me for the first time with osso bucco shanks, Arabian-style. I felt unworthy of such Epicurean delights, but our octogenarian couscous endearments were interrupted by the shrilling trumpets of 7pm News. Newsreader Tamara Oudyn, in a fetching frock, promised us news items including, “Back to Butler [Pennsylvania]. Trump returns to the site of July’s assassination attempt.”

“Bet that’ll be negative!” I gloomed.

I’m used to the Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), which ABC chairman, Kim Williams, exemplified in his recent Monash Oration, no doubt noted by his ABC’s 2000-odd journos.[1] But Tami’s item (at 17.50mins) was a corker by any standard.

First the ABC spliced in its usual tight shots of Trump’s front audience to avoid showing the vast attendance (check out the real thing here, last photo), then Oudyn read from her autocue,

Trump spoke for more than 90 minutes, repeating falsehoods about immigration and his political opponents.

Oh so objective and impartial! But what exactly comprised these ABC-verified 90-minutes of “falsehoods”? Tami didn’t say. Instead the tax-funded ABC ran Trump saying, correctly but without any context, “And right here in Pennsylvania we have bled together. We have bled.” Apart from killing volunteer firefighter Corey Comperatore, 50, Butler assassin Thomas Crooks also wounded two attendees aged 57 and 74. ABC editors figured that their 50 seconds on Trump and his “falsehoods” was sufficiently robust and then switched to Alan Kohler musing about housing.

The identical script on Trump’s “falsehoods” ran that night on ABC Tasmania (at 17.20mins), SA at 22.20mins, and ABC WA (16.40mins) but were crowded out on the NSW, ACT and Queensland bulletins by some sort of sporting event. My point is that the item isn’t blameable on some random ABC journo, like Anushri Sood in Canberra piping up for Israeli-Hezbollah equivalence. ABC editors farmed out the Trump-liar script from on high.

How does this “falsehood” item stack up against News Director Justin Stevens’ professed ethics requirements? As he put it three weeks ago:

We aspire to fair and thorough reporting that allows audiences to make their own judgements about topics and issues that matter to them… Underpinning the ABC’s trust are our editorial standards. Our staff are rightly held to the highest standards because they work for the Australian taxpayer… Make no mistake, part of my job description as Director of News is upholding and enforcing our high standards.

So what are these standards? Here goes:

The ABC has a statutory duty to ensure that the gathering and presentation of news and information is impartial according to the recognised standards of objective journalism.

Aiming to equip audiences to make up their own minds is consistent with the public service character of the ABC… The ABC takes no editorial stance other than its commitment to fundamental democratic principles.

The compilers of the policies above never contemplated the ABC would itself run vendettas against public figures. Under “Standards”, they insistence is that commentary should not be presented as “the editorial opinion of the ABC … Do not unduly favour one perspective over another.”

ABC policies are particularly stringent about Australian election coverage. I assume that, in principle, the ABC is expected to treat overseas elections with the same fairness. Local guidelines for “high quality coverage” of elections require:

Good-faith efforts to fairly and accurately obtain, scrutinise and report the actions and policies of those seeking election …thoughtful attention to issues of style and tone which may inadvertently colour perceptions of impartiality.

Truth is the best defence, so what actually comprised those ABC-purported Trump “falsehoods” about immigration and his opponents?

In the news item there’s no sign any of the ABC’s Democrat-friendly US team either travelled to the rally or spent time online taking notes from the videos of it. The ABC in print on September 6 ran a serviceable piece from AP agency on it, with no abusive reference to any purported Trump lies, and respectful treatment of Trump’s tribute to slain fireman Comperatore. I’ve found no transcript of the speech online.[2] So how did the ABC’s “professionals” verify that Trump told “falsehoods”?

To play devil’s advocate against Trump, I looked over a supposed Fact Check by US outfit Politifact, part of the Democrat/woke axis via the Florida-based Poynter Institute.[3] This fact check was re-circulated by other Trump-unfriendly outlets. including Qatar’s Hamas-loving Al Jazeera. The “fact check” damned various alleged details in Trump’s script and ad libs. Here are the worst “offences” they discovered:

CLAIM: Harris’ “border czar” title did not make her responsible for the security at the porous border itself.

But the media at the time endorsed her border-security task and title.

CLAIM: The record low illegal entries by illegals came eight months earlier than the date Trump nominated.

The low figure was achieved, however, during Trump’s presidency, just as he said. So the claim was right but the date, a relatively minor detail, was wrong.

CLAIM: Trump allegedly overstated that “millions” of criminals have crossed the border and been allowed into the US.

Some 13,099 alien convicted murders are at large in the US. That’s not Trump’s number, it comes straight from a statement issued by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

CLAIM: Harris hasn’t pledged to dismantle the Immigration & Enforcement Agency (ICE). She said only that it should be re-examined and maybe rebuilt from scratch.

In a congressional hearing she also likened ICE to the Klan and, at other times, has claimed agents whipped border-crossers and that the agency is rife with racism.

CLAIM: Homeless citizens in the wake of Cyclone Helene got no more than the $US750 each.

Trump complained that sum was insultingly low, even for what is the first of support payments yet to come and certainly by the standards of earlier catastrophes. As to the fact-checkers’ other gotchas, they were nit-picky trivial:

♦ Trump only achieved the “greatest ever” economy in terms of low unemployment since the 1940s, not in GDP growth and various other metrics

♦ Average American families haven’t lost $US29,000 from Biden-era price hikes because there were offsets from wage rises.

♦ The US doesn’t have the most oil reserves, it’s only ninth-largest in oil and fourth-largest in gas reserves, but first in coal.

♦ The controversial Algerian women’s boxing victor at this year’s Olympics hadn’t transitioned from male despite her apparent XY chromosomes.

Love or hate Trump, these are all quibbles relative to his main arguments. As Hamlet almost said, “Use every [politician] after his desert, and who shall ‘scape whipping?” On US immigration controversies, the ABC has no intention of broadcasting non-falsehoods like

♦ Biden and Harris from 2021-24 let in 11 million known border-crossers and 2 million-plus undetected crossers, known as ‘gotaways’. The estimated illegal aliens resident under Biden is now around 9 million, equal to the population of Austria, Hungary, or Israel.

♦ Biden let in 8.4% of the entire population of Honduras, and 4-6% of the entire population of Nicaragua, Cuba, Guatemala, El Salvador and Haiti respectively, not to mention 3% of Venezuela’s. And they’re just the known alien border encounters and “paroled-in” entrants.

♦ Biden has allowed in 525,000 unaccompanied alien children. Hundreds of thousands of them have been released into the care of self-identified guardians, including sex traffickers and gangsters. The fate of a further 90,000 alien children is simply unknown to authorities.

For interest’s sake I checked ABC coverage of Harris’ claims in last month’s debate with Trump. Her two chief falsehoods were that Trump threatened a “bloodbath” if he lost the election (his warning was of a car-industry bloodbath from Chinese imports),[4] and that Trump had called Nazis “very fine people” at his 2017 rally Charlottesville.[5] Her claims were not political flourishes. They were calculated verballing and both were debunked for years even by Democrat-leaning evidence-checkers such as Snopes. The ABC never called out those Kamala falsehoods. By contrast and as a typical example of the ABC’s standard fare, in this account of their debate Trump is twice accused of peddling whoppers.

I complained officially to ABC Ombudsman Fiona Cameron two days after the ABCTV’s Sunday 7pm News item. Within 48 hours, Investigations Officer  James responded

it was both accurate and newsworthy to note that former US President Trump had repeated ‘falsehoods about immigration and his political opponents’ during his [return to Butler] speech. Mr Trump’s false claims made during the recent presidential debate have been extensively fact-checked and reported by respected media outlets, for example here and here.

That was it. Not even one example or citation to establish what the ABC had presented as falsehoods were, in fact, actual falsehoods in the Butler speech.

In regard to the September 10 debate, James’ links are to purported fact-checks by the BBC, even more left-woke than the ABC, and the New York Times, which has run an anti-Trump editorial line, not least the Trump-Russia conspiracy canard, since his 2015 descent on the golden escalator to announce his candidacy. The quality of the work varies both between the two outlets and between their checks of Trump (harsh) and of  Harris (exculpatory). Neither mentioned or fact-checked Harris’s provable lie in the debate that Trump praised neo-Nazis during the Charlottesville unpleasantness as “very fine people”.

Providing no evidence, James’ note asserts that because Trump told purported falsehoods during the September  debate, he told the same purported falsehoods at his October 5 speech at Butler. Hence, by endorsing its own errors and indolence, the ABC item was thus “accurate and newsworthy”. This is absurd and unprofessional on multiple levels and I’ll kick my complaint upstairs to the Australian Communications and Media Authority, followed if necessary by an appeal to the Commonwealth Ombudsman. See my previous saga on those fronts here:  “It’s Official. I’m the One with the Problem.”

ABC Chair Kim Williams and News Director Stevens are both given to grand speeches about the ABC’s impartiality through which it supposedly has earned and retains the public’s trust. Let’s hope they’re part of the solution and not part of the problem. Here’s some Williams-isms from speeches of 4 and 25 September:

♦ The ABC is one of the most important institutions of our democracy, the mirror, the camera, and the microphone of Australia. 

♦ What can be done? The first thing is a recommitment to objectivity… “In my view, objectivity must never be compromised in any media organisation, especially in a publicly owned one like the ABC.” [Here’s an idea: start with the 7PM News].

♦ People trust the ABC because we earn their trust through our professionalism and objectivity and observe standards of public accountability … The value of a strong ABC as a source of truth and trust increases every day.

♦ We have to bridge the divides between classes, cultures, genders and communities. Creating richer, better quality news content and disseminating it across the entirety of our nation. [But Justin Stevens says half the country believes divisions are growing, and of those, half blame journalists][6]

 And here are some News Director Stevens-isms from the Melbourne Press Club, September 17:

♦ Every person who signs up to work as a journalist for ABC NEWS, and who receives the privilege of the public trust that comes from working under that respected and hard-won banner, accepts a responsibility in return – to strive at all times for accuracy, objectivity and fairness. Impartiality isn’t a choice at the ABC. It’s enshrined in the ABC Act.”

♦ There should be a range of opinions and conflicting views with no significant strand of thought under-represented. All information should be fact-based and verified [Except for bagging Trump].

♦ We don’t go soft in political interviews because we may happen to personally agree with the views of the guest.

♦ The best political interviewers have their reputations because they hold all comers equally accountable. The audience is unable to discern any agenda for an interview other than getting to the bottom of matters. [Yeah sure. And you’ve not got a single right-of-centre presenter].

The best fact-check of Stevens for any misinformation is 7.30’s Sarah Ferguson shmoozing her of Trump-haters.

In early August she had US guest journo David Sanger to recycle the Democrat Party’s “weird” meme about Trump’s running mate JD Vance. A week later (August 13) she was bootlicking Democrat ex-speaker Nancy Pelosi. Ferguson laid out her own view of Trump:

He’s clearly taken America to a dark place … Donald Trump poisoned American politics in a new way.

I lodged a formal complaint to the ABC about Ferguson’s overt bias. Response: nil.[7] Incidentally, from January to June, the ABC Ombudsman got 2000 complaints, checked 240 and upheld 27.

Ferguson followed up on September 4 with yet another Trump-hater, Anthony Scaramucci. He’d been fired for ineptitude seven years earlier after a mere 11 days as PR for President Trump, yet a reverential Ferguson treated him as an authority. Then, on September 26, her guest was Irish pundit  Fintan O’Toole,  opining about Trump:

If it’s policy, he loses. He doesn’t have policies … his appeal is about resentment, punishing the other tribe, and the pleasures that Trumpism undoubtedly gives its followers is a sort of sadistic pleasure [against] other people, really almost anybody who is not a white Christian man.

Ferguson, nodding along, beamed at this. Diversity of viewpoints? Not on 7.30.

For ABC journos, criticism is persecution. News Director Stevens is their mother hen pecking back at anyone going after his chicks such as $400,000-plus Ferguson, Tony “Voiceover” Armstrong and Anushri “Hezbollah. equivalence” Sood. As Stevens put it three weeks ago,

Sometimes what’s called ‘scrutiny’ is really an agenda-driven attack motivated by ideological, personal or commercial interests, often directed at specific journalists with the goal of denting their reputations. This trend across social media and from some media outlets – and let’s be honest and call it what it often is: bullying – is about more than just the ABC. Spurious attacks on SOME journalists can potentially erode the reputation of ALL journalists. And that feeds the public’s crisis of trust.

This is why the scale of unfair attacks on ABC journalists, whether by social media trolls, commentators, or our media competitors, should be called out.

Disturbingly, we disproportionately see women, First Nations and culturally diverse journalists being targeted.

 If I’ve hurt any feelings over there, I’m truly sorry. Even ABC lefties are human beings.

Hey, Mum! What’s for lunch? Osso bucco leftovers? Great!

 

Further reading

Some extracts of Trump’s Butler speech actually show him in his best form, especially his tribute to the slain Corey Comperatore. Here it is:

Corey, our beautiful Corey, Corey is not with us tonight, and he should be, and we all miss him. We are here not only to mark the triumph of American spirit but also to pay tribute to some of the best and bravest we have ever known. This field is now a monument to the valor of our first responders, to the resilience of our fellow citizens and to the sacrifice of a loving and devoted father, a really great man…

When the sound of gunshots pierced the air on that July evening, Corey leapt into the fire one more time. In his last seconds of this earth, he threw himself on the top of his wife and daughters. He didn’t want them hurt. And he was hit hard.

Every father, husband, in America, hopes that if the time came, we would have what Corey had. Tremendous courage, tremendous guts, and he wanted to protect his family, and he did protect his family.

The love that he showed on that day and throughout his life is the love that sustains the entire movement, love that our families have, and love of our communities and love of our country. It’s a force more powerful than any hatred and malice because even in the darkest hours, it shines forth as a guide, and it guides us like nothing could ever guide us. And so it’s love like Corey’s that is going to save our country, that’s going to heal our country, and that is going to reunite our country as one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

 

And here’s how Gerard Henderson captured Sarah Ferguson’s meeting of minds with Fintan O’Toole:

As Gerard Henderson recently put it:

Did anyone see the interview between ABC 7.30 presenter Sarah Ferguson and Irish Times journalist Fintan O’Toole on Thursday, 26 September? Your man O’Toole is in Australia to deliver a lecture titled “The Perils of Self-Pity: Democracy and Identity in the Age of Trump”. It’s part of the Vice-Chancellor’s Democracy Forum at the University of Technology (UTS), Sydney.

Comrade Ferguson told viewers (if viewers there were) that O’Toole possessed “one of the sharpest views on the dynamics of American politics” and that “he’s one of the world’s most influential columnists”. Impressive, eh? The problem was that the world’s greatest columnist did not have much more to say than what a reasonably well-informed viewer would already have known.

O’Toole said that “nobody knows” whether Kamala Harris will defeat Donald Trump in the US presidential election on November 5. Quelle surprise! And he spoke about the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968 – yes, over half a century ago.

The Irish Times columnist, who said he was a liberal (in the North American sense of the term), argued that Trump “doesn’t have policies” and is “not about achieving anything”. This would surprise some followers of US politics who are of the view that the former president wants to clamp down on unlawful immigrants and more besides.

As the interview came to a close, Comrade Ferguson asked, “Is there Trumpism after Trump?” Comrade O’Toole described this as a “fascinating question”. Really. He said that “if you go back two years … thinking Republicans” wanted “Trumpism without Trump”. Is any avid reader following this verbal sludge?

The interview ended with Fintan O’Toole implying that the prospect of a Trump victory was “terrifying” and with Sarah Ferguson urging viewers to “take a deep breath for the entire world”. And so cometh the end during which Ferguson declared “Fintan O’Toole, I could talk to you all night but stop I must.” To which Ellie’s (male) co-owner says: “Thank God.” (with a capital “G”)

 

[1] In his Monash Oration on 4 September, Kim Williams said, “Remove truth and you get a screaming match that creates and channels anger and hatred. People yelling past each other. Claiming that walls can keep enemies out, that drinking bleach can cure Covid…” This is obvious code for Trump’s views. Walls do keep people out, and claiming Trump urged drinking bleach is a Joe Biden lie that was rated “mostly false” even by Democrat-friendly Politifact: Fact-check: Did Trump tell people to drink bleach to kill the coronavirus? Williams berates “Populists” – another code for Trump.

[2] Transcribing long Trump speeches is a nightmare anyway

[3] Politfact fact-checked Trump during January-September with 57 “Falses” and zero “Trues”. The  Biden fact-checks were 11  “Falses” and 9 “Trues”. Kamala Harris got nine “Falses” and eight “Trues” . She has zero “Pants of Fire” ratings in the past 14 years, compared with Trump’s purported tally of 201.

[4] Trump: “No, we’re going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you’re [China] not going to be able to sell those cars if I get elected. Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s going to be the least of it, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the country, that’ll be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars, they’re building massive factories.”

[5] In a news conference after the rally protesting the planned removal of a Confederate statue, Trump did say there were “very fine people on both sides,” referring to the protesters and the counterprotesters. He said in the same statement he wasn’t talking about neo-Nazis and white nationalists, who he said should be “condemned totally.”

[6] From the 2023 Edelman Trust Survey.

[7] No response to my ABC complaint other than a form email 4 September: “The ABC receives many thousands of written complaints a year and we need to ensure a common-sense approach when responding. In summary, we will take action when warranted, engage where there is value in doing so, and note criticism of our performance when there is nothing more of substance we can offer. In some cases, including where your complaint relates to a matter of personal taste or preference, you may receive no more than this automated acknowledgement that your complaint has been received…Where a further response is provided, the ABC aims to respond to you within the next 30 days. However, please be aware that due to the large volume of correspondence we receive and the complex nature of some matters, responses may take longer than this.”