Andrew Bolt’s takedown of Greta Thunberg breached Press Council Standards
An article penned by Andrew Bolt about teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg being “deeply disturbed” and a “strange girl” with “so many mental disorders” did not treat the issues of mental heath and disabilities appropriately, Australia’s press watchdog has ruled.
In its defence of the article, News Corp, publisher of the Herald Sun and The Daily Telegraph, said it is entirely reasonable to describe Thunberg in such a way.
Bolt’s opinion of Thunberg, it said, was based on factual material publicised by both Thunberg and her mother.
It contended that as Thunberg and her family have been so open about her struggles, there is no chance Bolt’s article would contribute materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or pose a substantial risk to health and safety.
The article appeared online as ‘Andrew Bolt: Greta has no doubts, but we should‘ on 31 July last year, and then ‘The disturbing secret of the cult of Greta Thunberg‘ as an abridged blog the next day. In print, it was ‘Time to doubt Greta’s dogma’ on 1 August.
The articles also argued Thunberg was “freakishly influential”, and commented “I have never seen a girl with so many mental disorders treated by so many adults as a guru”.
The Press Council’s Standards of Practice require publications take reasonable steps to ensure factual material is presented with reasonable fairness and balance. It also requires publishers to avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or a substantial risk to health and safety, unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest.
The Council accepted that Thunberg’s mental state was a matter of public record, and had been relayed with reasonable accuracy in Bolt’s article.
The language used, however, and its treatment of mental health issues was likely to cause substantial offence, distress and prejudice, the Council ruled, as it attempted to diminish her credibility based on her disabilities. There was no public interest in undermining her credibility as a person, her opinions or her supporters on the basis of her disabilities, the Council said.
The Herald Sun published the ruling on its website today and on page four of the Herald Sun. The original article remains online.
Mentioning that she has a mental disorder is factual. Using the terms “deeply disturbed” and “strange girl” are not factual medical terms. Further, a mental disorder does not disqualify you form having a valid point of view. His words are hugely offensive and hateful.
User ID not verified.
How about Bolt release his mental records so we can be transparent about him. Eyeroll. I wish he’d stop dividing the public. His views are plain nasty and divisive.
User ID not verified.
Just because someone has a mental illness doesn’t make them wrong about everything by the way. The world obviously wanted to support what Greta had to say too or it wouldn’t have gone so wild. Sometimes it takes a brave person or someone without the same filter to say what a lot of us really want to say.
Disgusting to speak of unwell people this way. Imagine if it was talking about a physical disability – swap out the story to talk about someone with a disability in place of mental illness and you see how wrong this is.
Very glad the Press Council ruled this a breach. So it should have.
It will be interesting if the Australian Press Council pursues Waleed Aly and Pete Helliar every time they make a joke about Donald Trump’s mental state and the anguish that it might cause those with mental health issues to have them trivialised in the name of a laugh or left wing outrage.
User ID not verified.
More of that premium content from Newscorp.
User ID not verified.
Andrew Bolt is a repeat offender at this and whilst it it great that the ruling happened I think the consequences should be more equivalent to the outcome. I note that the article is still online. Were the newspaper forced to add a prominent caveat to it that ‘this article breaches the standards we set for the press in Australia as it contains material that is likely to cause substantial offence, distress and prejudice to people with a disability and attempts to diminish the credibility of the subject’s views based on her disabilities. There is no public interest served by this article as a result.” it might be more of a deterrant. Whilst such an approach might feed a few conspiracy theories it would enable the casual reader to see it for what it is.
User ID not verified.
So Bolt breached the rules (AGAIN) … and what was the consequence? Pretty much bugger all. Our press watchdog needs a power bone.
User ID not verified.
Her own mother describes in a book the various mental conditions she suffers from.
Dont criticise Andrew Bolt for telling the truth.
If you choose to take notice of her lectures go for it but most people prefer to listen to genuine experts.
User ID not verified.
What the world needs now is compassion and kindness. My heartfelt plea / naive wish is that Andrew Bolt and other influential voices role model open-mindness, care, willingness to listen and the grace to see the world from another’s’ point of view.
User ID not verified.
OR
A person could read it and simply make up their own mind about the merit of the article and any wording used.
User ID not verified.
The ‘PC’ brigade are immune from punishment.
That doesn’t excuse poor behaviour from the right, or left
– it just highlights the double-standards.
User ID not verified.
True, but I guess people that disagree with Waleed and/or Peter’s thoughts simply disagree and move on with their lives.
User ID not verified.
Nice one Harry.
As you point out – they are jokes. Substantially different from published ‘journalism’.
User ID not verified.
Can you please point out any of these ‘genuine experts’ that disagree with human accelerated climate change?
User ID not verified.
Can you please point out any of these ‘genuine experts’ that disagree with human accelerated climate change?
User ID not verified.
“most people prefer to listen to genuine experts.”
Except Bolt et al on anything climate-related.
User ID not verified.
Spare us this false equivalence nonsense. You know better, the APC knows better and so does Bolt.
User ID not verified.
There is a difference between these two characters.
One openly admits that they have clinical mental issues, but has a crystal clear view on how to ensure a better future for our planet.
The other can only criticise all that they see that they don’t like or disagree with, while self-proclaiming their own mental perspicacity.
User ID not verified.
I like how you are comparing Trump to a child. I’m glad you can see this too.
User ID not verified.
His views are divisive – just like CNN ABC
User ID not verified.
Agree wholeheartedly
Rules for thee etc.
User ID not verified.
Not Anti Bolt by any stretch of the imagination. He makes some good points every now and again …so do most people !). But he only succeeds in making a prize jackass of himself in regard to global warming. As far as I’m aware he has no qualifications , whatsoever, in regard to environmental science. In fact, he has no qualifications in anything…not even in journalism. Yet he insists on arguing about the subject with the likes of senior scientists from the CSIRO.
User ID not verified.
Repulsive commentary by Bolt. A main so steadfast in his righteousness and clearly so horribly wrong in his ethics.
Increasingly, it’s clear that the ideological divide between left and right in 2020 is no longer really about genuine politics or philosophical bases. It’s about people with compassion for others on the one side and people without compassion for others on the other. Simple as that. The right wing have cast themselves as synonymous with being mean-spirited, small-minded and selfish. What beggars belief is that many of them claim to have learned their life lessons and personal politics through their faith in an altruistic and humanitarian God.
User ID not verified.
It’s worth noting Bolt hasn’t been ‘punished’ here either. The Herald Sun published the ruling, and the original article includes a link to the ruling, but he’s not been censored or punished.
So it may come down more to who has complained, and what they’ve complained about – as the Press Council doesn’t investigate everything. Also, the Press Council wouldn’t rule on Peter Helliar and Waleed Aly on The Project, as it doesn’t regulate television. That would be the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). Here is the ACMA broadcasting complaint form: https://www.acma.gov.au/broadcasting-complaint-form
I hope that somewhat clears up the debate.
Thanks,
Vivienne – Mumbrella
Like many of the News Ltd “journalists” their blogs and columns are designed to garner ego stroking from their sycophant following.
In Bolts case with Thunberg it is additionally an unhealthy obsession
User ID not verified.
“most people prefer to listen to genuine experts”
Very true. So not Greta also!
User ID not verified.
Here we go again, A tirade of left wing opinion every time someone says something they disagree with. Truth is a lot of people agree with Bolt but if they dare to admit it, woe betide, the avengers will get you.
User ID not verified.
If you would only look for them, you would find them. Just google
User ID not verified.
Seriously? Bolt equated Greta Thunberg’s autism and ‘mental disorders’ with her being ‘strange’ and ‘deeply disturbed’. He was clearly mocking her in this context. This is so clearly abhorrent from any standpoint, regardless of whether we call ourselves left wing or right wing, wouldn’t you agree, Pete? It comes down to being a decent, compassionate human being, don’t you think? It comes down to having humanitarian values that should precede political values.
User ID not verified.
Greta is obviously not a climate science expert.
She is a powerful advocate for how many people feel about the implications of climate Science. Her mission is clearly to challenge people to think about their actions.
Hopefully people like Bolt (and you) get that distinction.
Criticising her for something she is not trying to be is just patronising and denialism.
User ID not verified.
Aaron, sure here you go: https://clintel.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ED-brochureversieNWA4.pdf
List of 500 scientist across the world. Nobel laureates, experts in their fields, from esteemed universities.
Your welcome.
Lots of other scientist and lots of other lists, publications, etc; albeit they are certainly in the minority.
That being said, and I really don’t want all the yelling, I do believe in climate change, it will be a negative effect on our planet and they key is to reduce overall C02 emissions as quickly as possible.
Listening to Greta, Prince Harry in bare feet, Al Gore or journalists isn’t the answer. Never was. Also denying there is no disagreement in the scientific community also doesn’t help.
User ID not verified.
+1
User ID not verified.
I’ve successfully planned away millions from touching this man’s newspaper. Never will the brands I look after sit next this vile man’s words.
Spare me your (not doing your job properly) rhetoric. I feel good about myself and my ethical work. Mental health is important.
User ID not verified.
Neither does Greta.
User ID not verified.
Stick it up them Andrew, give them the truth and give them hell.
User ID not verified.
@Pete What does left and right have to do with a so called journalist making hideous statements about Greta Thunberg?
Trump is on the right, the CCP on the left, both are authoritarian… Comprende?
User ID not verified.
Yes, but he does have common sense and appeals to me an average Australian, sick of do gooders and pc.
User ID not verified.
Why do people bother listening to Bolt. He appears to be extreme right wing. We don’t need extremists right or left they are usually to opinionated and won’t even listen to the alternatives.
User ID not verified.
If I could add, I’d say that the left is “compassion for all” and the right is “compassion only for our own”
User ID not verified.
Well I’m an average Australian and he does not appeal to me.
User ID not verified.
Aaron I did post a link, of a letter sent to the United Nations, with 500 Doctor’s, Professors, Nobel Laureates, PHD’s, etc expert’s in their field. But a moderator doesn’t seem to want to allow the comment through. Not sure why? Don’t they like a question being answered, don’t they like expert’s in their field and climate science for that matter, do they not like the United Nations? Hmmmm
User ID not verified.
But unlike Bolt, Greta has science and scientists on her side.
User ID not verified.
Rubbish. It’s people challenging what others are force fed, and lap right up, from the media. Bolt is often right and I’m sure sometimes wrong. Get over it
User ID not verified.