Journo Hildebrand withdraws from MCA debate series after being told off for how he moderated
A debate series at Sydney’s Museum of Contemporary Art hosted by Joe Hildebrand has been axed after a falling out between the journalist and the MCA.
Mumbrella understands that Hildebrand declined to participate in the final session of the MCA On The Rocks series after the organisation complained about his moderation of a debate on body image earlier this month.
The July 18 debate – the second in the series moderated by Hildebrand – had featured writer Bob Ellis, Cleo editor Sharri Markson and quadriplegic and disability advocate Matt Lennox.
Afterwards the MCA complained to Hildebrand that it did not like his handling of the topic.
Hildebrand is the opinion editor of The Daily Telegraph and a panellist in Ten’s forthcoming morning show Studio 10.
The August 15 debate which has now been axed was to have featured former ALP national president Warren Mundine, Masterchef winner Julie Goodwin and UTS School of Architecture lecturer Tarsha Finney.
Tensions had already risen between Hilderband and the MCA after the first two debates received little publicity.
When approached for comment, Hildebrand told Mumbrella: “About a week after the second show I received a phone call out of the blue from a staffer at the MCA saying their supervisor had ‘sat in’ on the last show and instructed her to tell me not to deviate from the topic of the discussion in the future – a bit rich I thought since the topic was entirely conceived by me in the first place.
“I found it completely outrageous and unacceptable that any figure of authority – let alone one supposedly working in the arts – would dictate to the host of a discussion panel what they and their guests could and couldn’t talk about it. The supervisor has never made themselves known to me, nor has the MCA even told me their name.”
The debate was presented by the MCA as “Ideas shaken and stirred”.
Hildebrand added: “I have done countless events of this nature live and on TV and I have never before in my professional life been told by an organiser or producer what I was or wasn’t allowed to say. As a longstanding and vocal proponent of free speech I would be stunned if anyone attempted to and indeed was when this happened.”
The MCA declined to comment on what problem the organisation had with Hildebrand’s moderation of the panel, which Mumbrella understands had seen Ellis in typically outspoken form.
The MCA issued a brief statement to Mumbrella saying: “The third MCA On the Rocks event to be curated by Joe Hildebrand was cancelled by Joe last week. The MCA was happy for the event to proceed but Joe decided he did not wish to continue with a third event scheduled for 15th August.”
They added: “Tickets had gone on sale but as none had been sold there was no need for any refunds.”
Hildebrand added: “The incident was also the latest in a long list of disappointments at the MCA’s handling and promotion of the event. I won’t get into the various specifics but the fact that at the time of my cancellation the MCA had failed to sell a single ticket for the final show is perhaps telling.”
He pointed out: “For the record I should also state that I waived my fee for the whole series, all of which I had conceived of over some months and whose guests I had arranged, asking the MCA to donate the money to charity instead. They said they were unable to do that.
“I therefore declined the fee altogether.”
Tim Burrowes
Tim Burrowes founded Mumbrella in 2008. He worked on Mumbrella until 2021. At various points he was editor, content director and editor-at-large.
Linkedin
Smacks of an arrogant & craven MCA executive.
An event subtitled – Ideas shaken and stirred – conjures an expectation of an edgy provocative discussion going beyond the moderated middle ground we are conditioned to live within in todays PC Australia (it used to be an easy going place you know).
Whilst its voice is in decline; the ARTS has always been society’s last bastion of the free thinker. Venue /Topic = great fit.
So an MCA beneficiary (no doubt a well positioned /perked/priveleged soul) wants to have thier influence and opinion ADHERED to. AND then sends out their lackey to deliver the message and face the music. Why does this entity need to be anonymous? Do they have no faith in the opinion they want adhered to? Are they so unsure that NO level of accountability is palatable?
User ID not verified.
Not surprised in the least. The tiresome, spineless, pseudo-intellectuals at the MCA wear offence as a campaign button, all the while strutting around like what they do is open-minded and cutting-edge. That place is a deep-freeze on deep thought.
User ID not verified.
Well MCA have discovered that there’s famous and then there’s people who the general public are prepared to buy tickets to see. If they hadn’t sold a ticket two weeks out there was obviously very little interest.
User ID not verified.
What a joke.
A public servant wants to control the debate at ‘their’ venue?
Here’s a tip Public Servant. It’s our venue as taxpayers. It not ‘yours’.
Just publish the public servant’s name. After all, we pay the public servant’s salary. Not a private business…
And always remember, when you email a public servant, the correct ‘sign off’ at the end of your email should always be;
“You remain my servant”
Who owns the venue; who is it run for, and who pays the bills????
User ID not verified.
Reading MCrAp’s assessment, it would seem the MCA and Hildebrand are a perfect match.
Maybe that’s the problem?
Too similar…
User ID not verified.
The MCA’s not actually government. It’s a Not-For-Profit public company.
I used to be a member, they send you a report every year
Their FAQ’s say:
HOW IS THE MCA FUNDED?
The MCA receives ongoing funding and support from the NSW State Government through Arts NSW and the Commonwealth Government through the Australia Council. Each year the MCA raises 60% of its income from additional sources such as ticketed exhibitions and events, sponsorship, donations and venue hire.
http://www.mca.com.au/about/faqs/
Just sayin.
User ID not verified.