ACMA censures ABC News over ‘judgemental and pejorative’ Tony Abbott report
An ABC News report describing former Prime Minister Tony Abbott as “the most destructive politician of his generation” has incurred the wrath of the Australian Communications and Media Authority.
Following a complaint over a report on Abbott’s speech to a climate change conference in London last October, ACMA found the ABC’s political editor, Andrew Probyn, had breached the broadcaster’s code of practice.
In the complaint, the aggrieved viewer said: “Whilst watching the ABC News, […] Andrew Probyn unashamedly proclaimed Mr Tony Abbott as ‘the most destructive politician of his generation’!
“This was the nightly NEWS – not an editorial, not Q and A, not 7.30 and not any other platform which invites journalists to voice their personal opinions.
“We were supposed to be listening to an objective report of Tony Abbott’s speech in the UK, not listen to a political activist masquerading as a journalist editorialising.”
In its defence to the complaint, the ABC submitted: “[Abbott’s] speech, which was made as the government are finalising their new energy policy, was therefore highly newsworthy, in the public interest and appropriate for further contextualisation and analysis.
The ABC went on to state: “We have also referred to the Macquarie dictionary which provides the following definition for ‘destructive’: ‘tending to overthrow, disprove, or discredit’.
“It is the case that Mr Abbott over his long political career has succeeded in overthrowing his political and ideological opponents, and in his speech to the GWPF he sought to discredit or disprove the consensus on climate science. In the highly competitive context of federal politics, “destructive” is not necessarily a pejorative descriptor.”
The ABC ultimately rejected the complaint, saying: “We have concluded that Mr Probyn’s analysis was duly impartial and in keeping with the ABC’s editorial standards.”
ACMA rejected the ABC’s conclusion and ruled Probyn’s statement judgemental and pejorative, founding the report breached Standard 4.1 of the broadcaster’s code practice in that the report was not presented with due impartiality.
“The impartiality provisions in the ABC’s own code require it to demonstrate balance and fair treatment when presenting news, and avoid conveying a prejudgement”, said ACMA Chair Nerida O’Loughlin in a statement.
“This is only the second breach by the ABC of its impartiality rules since 2011. While this demonstrates strong compliance with these important provisions of the code, the ABC did not get it right on this occasion.”
The ABC had no comment when approached by Mumbrella over the ruling.
The aggrieved viewer ought to grow a thicker skin. Critical commentary about a politician, who would have thunk it? Hope they don’t read too, imagine what they might come across!
User ID not verified.
The ABC has been getting away with this political BIAS against conservatives since it was established NO ifs or buts . We need to get rid of this arm of the labour party.
User ID not verified.
You miss the point. It’s not a journalist’s role to make judgemental comments, but to report the facts accurately. Additionally, as an ABC journalist, Probyn is required by statute to be “fair and impartial” in reporting. If he chooses to move into opinion editorial outside of News, he may comment. Probyn betrayed his role in this instance, and should be benched for some months to go back and learn his trade. Frankly it’s unbelievable that we have to endure some cockney barrow-boy as a senior political reporter, when there are plenty of qualified Australians who can do that role.
User ID not verified.
Given Tony’s well documented love of the mother country I’m sure he doesn’t share your issues with journalists being cockneys :).
Fair and impartial doesn’t mean no critical commentary, obviously there would be times that it would be unfair to not provide criticism.
User ID not verified.
Given that it isn’t going to happen, you should deal the statement Probyn made. Was it wrong or was he not “allowed” to say it? If the ONLY thing Tony had done was his destruction of the NBN, that alone would have earned him Probyn’s accurate assessment.
User ID not verified.
Nonsense, Peter – and several independent inquiries over the past 40 years have said so.
HW
User ID not verified.
Agreed, Richard – I thought the ABC’s defence of Andrew Probyn and rebuttal of ACMA’s findings was exactly right.
So that proves I am biased, yes?
HW
User ID not verified.
The ABC got it right.
“The conservatives are so accustomed to media bias in their favour that any attempt by the ABC to be even-handed is seen as bias against them” (with acknowledgement to Sen James McClelland, who first said it in 1973…)
User ID not verified.
I don’t see what ACMA’s problem is. Tony Abbott has very clearly demonstrated – as a result of the leadership meltdown (or “Muppet Show, to quote Scott Morrison) in August alone – that he is indeed the most “destructive politician of his generation”. Probyn’s remark has been proven as fact!
All the former Prime Moron has done since he left office is to “snipe, undermine and white-ant” the Government from the backbench. That isn’t likely to change now Scott Morrison is the Prime Muppet because Abbott believes Morrison stabbed him in the back too!
Andrew Probyn’s remark might seem out of line (and it seems the former ABC chairman Justin Milne had it in for him as well) but I interpreted the term “destructive” (as the ABC itself did) as a statement of fact, not an editorial opinion – that is, Abbott is the most polarising and divisive politician of his generation. Abbott’s record on issues such as climate change, immigration and same sex marriage – from the moment he toppled Malcolm Turnbull to become opposition leader in 2009 – has been about disruption for disruption’s sake and creating the perception of an environment of chaos in the nation, whether that be during Julia Gillard’s and Malcolm Turnbull’s Prime Ministerships (which were far more competent than his own laughable attempt) or on hotcake issues like refugees and SSM.
It’s one of the reasons Abbott couldn’t make the step from being supposedly the most successful opposition leader in Australian history to being an effective statesman – because he’s a rabid, ideological attack dog who was determined to catch the car but once he got his teeth into its tyres couldn’t work out exactly what he was supposed to do with it! As a politician he has never grown with the times and reinvented himself, unlike his party’s revered leaders John Howard and Robert Menzies.
User ID not verified.