WEBVTT - The Media Show | 4 October 0:00:00.960 --> 0:00:06.040 This is the Media Show with Jack Outing. Welcome to 0:00:06.080 --> 0:00:08.840 the Media Show. Tonight. We'll discuss a feud between Media 0:00:08.880 --> 0:00:12.000 Watch and a star ABC reporter, as well as a 0:00:12.080 --> 0:00:16.360 major media union attacking Peter Dunnan. But first to the 0:00:16.440 --> 0:00:20.880 vice presidential debate, which exposed several media falsehoods. Now, it 0:00:21.000 --> 0:00:24.959 was a refreshing exchange of ideas, not dominated by personalities 0:00:25.120 --> 0:00:26.120 but policies. 0:00:27.160 --> 0:00:29.160 Look, I will be the first to tell you I 0:00:29.200 --> 0:00:31.880 have poured my heart into my community. I've tried to 0:00:31.880 --> 0:00:34.040 do the best I can, but I've not been perfect, 0:00:34.159 --> 0:00:36.559 and I'm a knucklehead at times, but it's always been 0:00:36.600 --> 0:00:38.280 about that. All I said on this was is I 0:00:38.320 --> 0:00:40.920 got there that summer and misspoke on this, So I 0:00:41.280 --> 0:00:43.160 will just that's what I've said. 0:00:43.360 --> 0:00:45.520 Honestly, Tim, I think you got a tough job here 0:00:45.640 --> 0:00:47.440 because you've got to play whack a mole. You've got 0:00:47.479 --> 0:00:51.159 to pretend that Donald Trump didn't deliver rising take hopey, which. 0:00:50.920 --> 0:00:51.680 Of course he did. 0:00:51.880 --> 0:00:55.160 You've got to pretend that Donald Trump didn't deliver lower inflation, 0:00:55.280 --> 0:00:57.880 which of course he did. And then you've simultaneously got 0:00:57.920 --> 0:01:01.639 to defend Kamala Harris's atrocious economic record, which has made 0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:05.520 gas groceries and housing unaffordable fair American citizens. 0:01:05.600 --> 0:01:09.160 Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have 0:01:09.280 --> 0:01:13.280 a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status 0:01:13.800 --> 0:01:16.080 temporary protected maura. 0:01:16.360 --> 0:01:17.240 But thank you, senator. 0:01:17.240 --> 0:01:18.880 We have so much to get to, Margaret. 0:01:18.959 --> 0:01:21.200 I think it's important to turn out of the economy. 0:01:21.240 --> 0:01:21.840 Thanks Margaret. 0:01:22.160 --> 0:01:23.800 The rules were that you got to be in a 0:01:23.880 --> 0:01:26.160 fact check, and since you're fact checking me, I think 0:01:26.200 --> 0:01:28.240 it's important to say what's actually going on. 0:01:28.400 --> 0:01:29.199 Thank you, senator. 0:01:29.319 --> 0:01:31.760 Rotation of a legal immigration Margaret Bye. 0:01:31.840 --> 0:01:35.199 Thank you senator for describing the legal process. 0:01:35.400 --> 0:01:36.679 Have so much to get to. 0:01:36.800 --> 0:01:41.200 The senator so much the book since nineteen ninety Thank you, gentlemen. 0:01:41.720 --> 0:01:43.800 We want to have map has not been on the books. 0:01:45.319 --> 0:01:50.640 Something gentlemen, the audience can't hear you because your mics 0:01:50.680 --> 0:01:51.200 are cut. 0:01:51.800 --> 0:01:54.360 Both candidates were measured in tone, which allowed for the 0:01:54.360 --> 0:01:58.200 philosophical differences between both parties to play the lead role. 0:01:58.720 --> 0:02:01.240 It also shattered alt I told to you by the 0:02:01.240 --> 0:02:05.559 American media. There has been an insidious and coordinated media 0:02:05.600 --> 0:02:10.000 attack on the character of Senator James David Vance now 0:02:10.040 --> 0:02:12.800 add Holme and attacks on conservatives are nothing new, but 0:02:12.919 --> 0:02:14.519 this one was simply weird. 0:02:15.560 --> 0:02:18.000 I think Kamala Harris is going to pick anyone as 0:02:18.040 --> 0:02:20.440 weird and creepy as Jadie Vance. 0:02:20.840 --> 0:02:24.600 It demonstrates and shows us exactly what he believes in 0:02:24.800 --> 0:02:26.000 by selecting a JD. 0:02:26.200 --> 0:02:28.679 Vance, who is quite. 0:02:30.040 --> 0:02:31.679 You know, as the campaign said. 0:02:31.480 --> 0:02:35.200 Weird, the agenda, the way they talk to people, the 0:02:35.240 --> 0:02:36.680 way they address people. 0:02:37.040 --> 0:02:41.280 It is bizarre. It's weird, it is weird. These are 0:02:41.320 --> 0:02:41.880 weird people. 0:02:41.960 --> 0:02:44.200 On the other side, Donald Trump seems to be drifting 0:02:44.200 --> 0:02:46.680 away from his own nominee because he's had so many 0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:47.560 weird views. 0:02:47.919 --> 0:02:50.760 Unfortunately, Events's weird views are not even winning praise from 0:02:50.760 --> 0:02:52.000 within his own party. 0:02:52.320 --> 0:02:54.639 Donald Trump and his weirdo running mate and the Republican 0:02:54.639 --> 0:02:55.760 apparatus behind them. 0:02:55.639 --> 0:02:58.200 Will regroup yours. It's not just that she said a 0:02:58.240 --> 0:03:01.400 lot of things that are weird. It's not just a 0:03:01.440 --> 0:03:04.760 weird style that he brings. It's that this leads to 0:03:04.880 --> 0:03:09.600 weird policies. But when the public got to hear directly 0:03:09.639 --> 0:03:13.640 from Vance, many were shocked that this supposedly evil caricature 0:03:13.639 --> 0:03:16.320 of a Republican that they had been told to fear 0:03:16.760 --> 0:03:20.000 was not only reasonable, but he was articulate and a 0:03:20.000 --> 0:03:23.880 lot of people witness this performance. Analytics company Nielsen estimates 0:03:23.919 --> 0:03:28.160 that forty three million Americans watched the debate on TV, 0:03:28.600 --> 0:03:31.880 with many millions more opting to stream it. Polling also 0:03:31.919 --> 0:03:35.600 suggests that the debate was received positively by voters. Now, 0:03:35.640 --> 0:03:39.280 this of course infuriated the hacks at MSNBC who have 0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:43.480 been overtly campaigning for the Democrats. They want you to 0:03:43.600 --> 0:03:47.040 ignore what you saw and what you heard because they 0:03:47.040 --> 0:03:50.240 claim it was a lie. That wasn't the real jd 0:03:50.280 --> 0:03:53.240 Evance that they have come to loathe and fear. 0:03:54.680 --> 0:03:58.200 There were so many niceties on their debate station. I 0:03:58.320 --> 0:04:00.760 am just kind of like, well, if you agree so 0:04:00.840 --> 0:04:02.760 much with jd Vance, why should they vote for you. 0:04:03.720 --> 0:04:06.200 I fully believe that Governor Walls went out there tonight 0:04:06.200 --> 0:04:09.080 and did what was practicing debate prep, did what the 0:04:09.160 --> 0:04:12.640 strategy was that the team put together. That was not 0:04:12.720 --> 0:04:15.000 the Governor Walls that I had seen out on the 0:04:15.040 --> 0:04:17.039 campaign trip. That's not the Governor Walls that I had 0:04:17.040 --> 0:04:19.600 seen during the beepstakes, right, that was not the jd 0:04:19.720 --> 0:04:20.960 Vance that I know to be true. 0:04:21.080 --> 0:04:23.080 I mean goodness, jd Vance was on that stage. 0:04:23.120 --> 0:04:26.080 He was sorry about Amber Thurman he was sorry about 0:04:26.080 --> 0:04:27.640 a boy. He was sorry about a lot of stuff. 0:04:28.040 --> 0:04:30.680 We get things wrong, but do you give it the policy? 0:04:31.960 --> 0:04:35.279 And The New York Times published perhaps the most radical 0:04:35.320 --> 0:04:39.040 and unhitched commentary of the debate. They allowed columnist Masha 0:04:39.080 --> 0:04:42.440 Geeson to make the argument that the act of debating 0:04:42.560 --> 0:04:46.240 itself was wrong because it puts Democrats and Republicans on 0:04:46.320 --> 0:04:49.120 a level footing, and because we all know that Republicans 0:04:49.160 --> 0:04:53.599 are evil monsters. By allowing the debate, we are justifying 0:04:53.720 --> 0:04:54.640 the acts of evil. 0:04:56.200 --> 0:04:59.360 I went into Tuesday's vice presidential debate with a sense 0:04:59.360 --> 0:05:02.800 of dread because I thought that the last debate was 0:05:03.480 --> 0:05:06.839 kind of a disaster. And by a disaster, I don't 0:05:06.839 --> 0:05:11.159 mean that Kamala Harris didn't hold her own against Donald Trump, 0:05:11.320 --> 0:05:14.440 or that Donald Trump scored any points in the debate, 0:05:14.800 --> 0:05:18.160 but the fact of the debate itself, and the format 0:05:18.160 --> 0:05:22.080 of the debate, which placed these two candidates on a 0:05:22.120 --> 0:05:25.760 sort of level footing, treated them both as normal politicians 0:05:26.000 --> 0:05:30.240 and treated the things they said as normal political statements. 0:05:31.720 --> 0:05:34.600 Well, that's crazy. And dare I say weird stuff from 0:05:34.600 --> 0:05:37.599 an outlet which is so self indulgent it refers to 0:05:37.640 --> 0:05:41.280 itself as the newspaper of record. The paper of Record 0:05:41.320 --> 0:05:44.440 advocating against debate is perhaps the best way to sum 0:05:44.520 --> 0:05:50.640 up modern journalism. Well, joining me now is the Australians 0:05:50.680 --> 0:05:55.599 media writer Sophie Elsworth and Sky and News contributor Louise Roberts. Louise, 0:05:55.680 --> 0:05:57.360 let's start with you. What did you make of the debate? 0:05:59.800 --> 0:06:00.160 Well? 0:06:00.600 --> 0:06:04.480 Walslocks me when he said that he was a knucklehead. 0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:07.040 I think that's not something you really want a presidential 0:06:07.080 --> 0:06:10.480 candidate we're talking about in a way, whereas I think J. 0:06:10.600 --> 0:06:13.359 D Vance was very presidential. Dare I say he was 0:06:13.480 --> 0:06:17.240 very youthful. He didn't have an issue with tackling the 0:06:17.360 --> 0:06:19.560 fact checkers as well, which I thought was a very 0:06:19.600 --> 0:06:22.479 bold move and it made a very good impression I 0:06:22.480 --> 0:06:25.120 think on myself as well as I think audiences around 0:06:25.120 --> 0:06:28.560 the world too. So I just don't understand Walts at all. 0:06:28.600 --> 0:06:31.560 I don't understand why has to embellish his history and 0:06:31.600 --> 0:06:33.960 claim to be in gentleman square when in fact he 0:06:34.040 --> 0:06:36.520 was in Nebraska and he's forever having to sort of 0:06:36.800 --> 0:06:40.880 overcome the sort of goofy, bumbling suburban dad routine that 0:06:40.920 --> 0:06:43.240 he's created in some sort of effort to win over 0:06:43.680 --> 0:06:46.640 the white male votes. So for me, it was definitely 0:06:46.640 --> 0:06:47.599 Advance was the winner. 0:06:47.920 --> 0:06:49.800 Yeah, I agree, I agree with all of that, and 0:06:49.880 --> 0:06:54.440 Sophie he Waltz appeared to be intellectually outmatched. And I 0:06:54.440 --> 0:06:57.080 think the point that I made in my editorial, which is, 0:06:57.880 --> 0:06:59.719 I think for people that have been watching the media 0:06:59.720 --> 0:07:02.360 cover you don't quite know who jd. Vance is, who 0:07:02.400 --> 0:07:06.440 were just getting little snippets of information from bulletins and headlines, 0:07:07.000 --> 0:07:10.720 they would think that he is this crazy, weirdo, ultra 0:07:10.840 --> 0:07:14.080 conservative nutjob, because that's what they've been telling him, and 0:07:14.120 --> 0:07:18.440 they've obviously polled that answer, they've obviously market tested it. 0:07:18.440 --> 0:07:20.880 It's no reason that they were all using this word 0:07:20.920 --> 0:07:24.280 weird and you could see it all over Twitter. What 0:07:24.400 --> 0:07:26.920 do you think of the way that jd Vance was 0:07:26.960 --> 0:07:29.200 able to pivot from this and do you think he 0:07:29.320 --> 0:07:32.480 was able to effectively show the American people who he 0:07:32.760 --> 0:07:33.880 was directly? 0:07:36.720 --> 0:07:36.920 Well? 0:07:36.960 --> 0:07:40.200 I think he spoke quite well throughout the debate. He 0:07:40.280 --> 0:07:43.920 did challenge the moderators there, and you can see that 0:07:44.040 --> 0:07:47.000 they were quite quick to try and stop him from 0:07:47.040 --> 0:07:51.119 doing that. But when you call someone weird, it's kind 0:07:51.160 --> 0:07:55.440 of hard to push that away and fight against If 0:07:55.440 --> 0:07:58.480 someone says you're weird, how do you defend yourself against that? 0:07:58.840 --> 0:07:59.720 So it's kind of. 0:07:59.680 --> 0:08:04.560 A label that sticks and then does go throughout all 0:08:04.600 --> 0:08:07.320 the media. But I do think these debates are really 0:08:07.360 --> 0:08:11.480 important so that the American public can make their own 0:08:11.520 --> 0:08:17.080 minds up. With both of the vice presidential candidates speaking 0:08:17.120 --> 0:08:18.960 to their points, and I thought, you know, they were 0:08:19.040 --> 0:08:22.120 quite fair to each other. But I think the American 0:08:22.120 --> 0:08:25.520 public are not silly. They can see sometimes these moderators 0:08:26.480 --> 0:08:30.320 favorably on their democratic side, and I don't think that's 0:08:30.360 --> 0:08:32.400 always a good thing because they can see through the 0:08:32.480 --> 0:08:35.880 bias there. But I think the more of these debates 0:08:35.920 --> 0:08:38.560 we have in the lead up to the election, I think. 0:08:38.360 --> 0:08:42.360 The better, Yeah, definitely. And Louise, I think the other 0:08:42.400 --> 0:08:45.200 point to make as well, what Sophie was saying about 0:08:45.200 --> 0:08:48.160 the fact checking, the way that jd Vance handled that 0:08:48.360 --> 0:08:50.520 was rather calm. And I think the mistake that Donald 0:08:50.559 --> 0:08:54.120 Trump made at the last debate was he got baited 0:08:54.280 --> 0:08:58.920 into this kind of the petty semantics over crowd sizes, 0:08:59.240 --> 0:09:02.640 whereas jd Vance was able to, I guess, give life 0:09:02.760 --> 0:09:06.080 to some of these policies that they're running on and 0:09:06.240 --> 0:09:07.920 take a little bit of the drama out of it, 0:09:07.960 --> 0:09:10.359 even though he was pushing back against some of these 0:09:10.440 --> 0:09:11.400 bizarre fact checks. 0:09:13.160 --> 0:09:15.439 That's right. He took a very presidential time. I felt 0:09:15.440 --> 0:09:17.480 he took control. He sort of challenged it, but then 0:09:17.520 --> 0:09:19.360 shut it down and realized the whole point of this 0:09:19.400 --> 0:09:21.760 debate was to talk about the two men in question 0:09:21.840 --> 0:09:23.920 and their policies. So yeah, impressive. 0:09:24.440 --> 0:09:27.120 Yeah, well, let's move on now. Because Opposition leader Peter 0:09:27.200 --> 0:09:30.960 Dutton locked horns with an ABC reporter this week who 0:09:31.040 --> 0:09:36.839 incredibly compared Israel to the murderous terror organization has Belah. 0:09:37.320 --> 0:09:40.520 Groups have commented on the hypocrisy of that situation because 0:09:40.520 --> 0:09:43.840 there are no bands currently on Israeli flags being reased 0:09:43.840 --> 0:09:47.160 despite forty five thousand people Jarney at the heads. 0:09:47.200 --> 0:09:51.480 Any Well, Israel is a democracy, It's not run by 0:09:51.520 --> 0:09:55.640 a terrorist organization. HEZBLO is a terrorist organization. They're a 0:09:55.679 --> 0:10:01.839 listed terrorist organization. And if people are in favor of 0:10:01.880 --> 0:10:05.080 a terrorist organization, they should declare it and that authority 0:10:05.080 --> 0:10:11.439 should deal with it. What determined, what. 0:10:10.880 --> 0:10:12.040 Determines what happens? 0:10:14.200 --> 0:10:20.600 Even though men, where are you from? I'm sorry? Which organization? ABC? 0:10:21.320 --> 0:10:23.360 So what's the question from the ABC? Just to be 0:10:23.440 --> 0:10:26.800 very clear. What was the question you asked? Now you 0:10:26.800 --> 0:10:28.520 asked the question about the listing, So I just want 0:10:28.640 --> 0:10:30.720 I want you to just ask that question again. 0:10:32.040 --> 0:10:36.760 What determines the cast? 0:10:37.160 --> 0:10:39.640 Well, I had presumed up until this point at least 0:10:39.640 --> 0:10:43.120 that the ABC supported the government's laws, and the government 0:10:43.200 --> 0:10:47.040 has passed laws supported on a bipartisan basis, but not 0:10:47.080 --> 0:10:50.120 by the ABC. It seems in relation to the prescribing 0:10:50.160 --> 0:10:53.480 or the listing of a terrorist organization. Hezbla under Australian 0:10:53.520 --> 0:10:56.000 law is a list of terrorist organization. Now, if the 0:10:56.040 --> 0:10:58.440 ABC doesn't support that, they should be very clear about it, 0:10:58.440 --> 0:11:01.200 because I think that's quite a departure. But you asked 0:11:01.200 --> 0:11:06.720 me why why our country has listed Hesbela. They're a 0:11:06.800 --> 0:11:10.360 terrorist organization that they organized terrorist attacks. And if that 0:11:10.480 --> 0:11:12.440 is not clear to the ABC, then I think the 0:11:12.440 --> 0:11:15.120 ABC is in greater trouble. And even I first imagined 0:11:15.640 --> 0:11:16.560 that was the main question. 0:11:18.040 --> 0:11:21.640 Now, just to make it really clear what you just watched, 0:11:21.679 --> 0:11:26.280 there was a reporter asking why Jews holding Israeli flags 0:11:26.600 --> 0:11:29.800 were not being targeted under terrorism laws the way that 0:11:29.960 --> 0:11:33.160 Hesbelah flags were being targeted. Now it's no surprise that 0:11:33.240 --> 0:11:36.920 the ABC attempted to distance itself from this The Australian 0:11:36.960 --> 0:11:41.440 reports ABC disowns questions to Peter Dutton over Hesbela status 0:11:41.480 --> 0:11:44.760 as a terrorist organization now and the quote given to 0:11:44.920 --> 0:11:47.280 Sophie Elsworth, who is here on the panel with us, 0:11:47.480 --> 0:11:51.200 was questions at a press conference today were not a 0:11:51.240 --> 0:11:54.440 piece of reporting nor a position being taken by the ABC. 0:11:54.800 --> 0:11:59.000 HESBLA is listed as a terrorist organization by the Australian 0:11:59.040 --> 0:12:03.800 government and the recognizes that in its coverage now. This response, 0:12:03.880 --> 0:12:08.840 which is quite reasonable, infuriated the journalism Union MEAA, which 0:12:08.880 --> 0:12:12.520 posted a very heated statement condemning both Peter Dutton and 0:12:12.559 --> 0:12:17.119 the ABC. They said, the National Committee of MEAA Media 0:12:17.240 --> 0:12:21.559 has unanimously passed a resolution in support of ABC journalist 0:12:21.800 --> 0:12:27.120 and Usher should following her encounter with an aggressive Peter 0:12:27.280 --> 0:12:30.320 Dutton earlier this week. Let's bring the panel back into 0:12:30.360 --> 0:12:35.840 discuss Sophie great reporting on this issue. The media union 0:12:36.240 --> 0:12:39.800 inserting itself into this, I think that's fine to stand 0:12:39.840 --> 0:12:42.680 up for journalists, but for them to characterize Peter Dutton 0:12:42.679 --> 0:12:45.800 as being aggressive, for me, that's nonsensical. He was not 0:12:45.880 --> 0:12:48.199 being aggressive. I think you could make the point that 0:12:48.400 --> 0:12:52.320 Anthony Albanisi gets a lot shorter with journalists and Peter 0:12:52.400 --> 0:12:55.840 Dutton ever, was at any point in that clip his voice, 0:12:56.480 --> 0:13:00.360 his tone was low, it was measured. Did you see 0:13:00.360 --> 0:13:02.760 that as him being aggressive towards the journalist. 0:13:05.120 --> 0:13:07.760 Well, the Media Union have to be really careful Jack 0:13:07.800 --> 0:13:11.160 when they put out these statements, because they just ostracize 0:13:11.160 --> 0:13:13.160 some of their member base and that is not a 0:13:13.200 --> 0:13:17.040 wise thing when the ME double A is always desperately 0:13:17.160 --> 0:13:20.560 trying to seek new members to join up, and I 0:13:20.559 --> 0:13:23.240 think this is an unwise thing for them to do. 0:13:23.679 --> 0:13:26.560 It could have been handled much better. And they do 0:13:26.640 --> 0:13:32.920 take their positions to protect particular journalists for particular causes 0:13:33.440 --> 0:13:37.439 that fit in with their ideological views, and this can 0:13:37.480 --> 0:13:41.680 be problematical also for the ME double A. So this 0:13:41.960 --> 0:13:45.840 is a pretty you know, eye opening way for them 0:13:45.880 --> 0:13:51.119 to describe the opposition leader. And it's also a concern 0:13:51.720 --> 0:13:55.440 whether some of these journalists are becoming activists or are 0:13:55.480 --> 0:13:59.720 they're actually they're reporting facts and that's where sometimes the 0:13:59.760 --> 0:14:01.480 media gets themselves into trouble. 0:14:01.800 --> 0:14:04.040 Yeah, it's a great point. Louis Kim Williams, the new 0:14:04.080 --> 0:14:06.800 chair of the ABC, has said multiple times now that 0:14:07.080 --> 0:14:11.760 he doesn't want young activist journalists to be viewing stories 0:14:11.960 --> 0:14:15.880 in that particular lens. In this situation, it's clear that 0:14:15.960 --> 0:14:19.280 the reporter was viewing it through this lens or they 0:14:19.320 --> 0:14:23.160 were told to ask a specific question. I don't think 0:14:23.160 --> 0:14:26.440 it's that, because the question seemed a bit too conversational 0:14:26.720 --> 0:14:30.760 to be scripted very specifically, and the ABC hasn't really 0:14:30.800 --> 0:14:33.400 backed her in. But this seems to be a clear 0:14:33.600 --> 0:14:36.680 example of a breach of that guideline. Well, what do 0:14:36.720 --> 0:14:37.480 you think about all of this? 0:14:39.240 --> 0:14:41.360 Well, it does because as young journalists and so ife, 0:14:41.360 --> 0:14:43.120 you would know that as well. When you're trained, you're 0:14:43.160 --> 0:14:45.840 asked to see both sides of the store, and you 0:14:45.880 --> 0:14:48.360 don't bring your bias or your opinion to a new 0:14:48.480 --> 0:14:51.320 situation like that. And I think to actually label for 0:14:51.360 --> 0:14:53.560 the Union, to label Peter Dutton as a bully is 0:14:53.680 --> 0:14:57.320 ridiculous because he's asking for clarification and we know that 0:14:57.360 --> 0:15:01.160 Israel's not a terrorist organization, so and hesbler is that's 0:15:01.200 --> 0:15:04.760 why they're banned. So to make out that he's bullying 0:15:04.800 --> 0:15:09.120 a journalist, it's a very very sort of sloppy trope. 0:15:09.120 --> 0:15:11.400 I think to say that, oh, he's bullied her, therefore 0:15:11.440 --> 0:15:13.240 he's in the wrong, when will he is just asking 0:15:13.240 --> 0:15:16.600 for clarification, and I think any situation we have to 0:15:16.640 --> 0:15:19.560 really hold journals to account. Don't push your own agenda, 0:15:20.000 --> 0:15:21.080 just report the facts. 0:15:21.680 --> 0:15:23.120 It makes such a good point. I mean, have a 0:15:23.120 --> 0:15:26.320 bit of resilience. There's always argie barji a press conferences. 0:15:26.320 --> 0:15:29.000 That's a journal's job. We're all criticized. I'd love one 0:15:29.000 --> 0:15:31.360 of these ABC journalists to spend one day in the 0:15:31.400 --> 0:15:34.880 shoes of a news corp journalist getting even one iota 0:15:35.000 --> 0:15:38.480 of the criticism that they that all of our colleagues 0:15:38.520 --> 0:15:41.400 get on social media constantly. They would not be able 0:15:41.400 --> 0:15:43.160 to handle it. But let's go to a quick break 0:15:43.280 --> 0:15:46.560 when we're back Tony Armstrong and the ABC's Media Watch 0:15:46.720 --> 0:15:55.280 clash Welcome Back Indigenous. ABC presenter Tony Armstrong was criticized 0:15:55.280 --> 0:15:59.080 in a Media Watch segment this week for performing unapproved 0:15:59.120 --> 0:16:02.160 commercial voice sofa work for an insurance company. 0:16:03.640 --> 0:16:06.080 A help company would cover you no matter who's driving 0:16:06.120 --> 0:16:08.640 your car, because you should be able to lend your 0:16:08.640 --> 0:16:10.120 friends and family your vehicle. 0:16:11.200 --> 0:16:14.720 That's NRMA selling its pivot from an insurance company to 0:16:14.800 --> 0:16:19.000 a help company, which sounds much cuddlier and for maximum umph. 0:16:19.200 --> 0:16:23.640 The rebranding coincided with nine's Olympic coverage with NRMA, a 0:16:23.760 --> 0:16:27.480 major advertising partner, and the ads are on Radio two. 0:16:27.800 --> 0:16:31.480 At NRMA Insurance. We're responding to the growing severity and 0:16:31.600 --> 0:16:35.600 frequency of floods, fuires, high winds and hail events by 0:16:35.720 --> 0:16:36.760 establishing help. 0:16:36.680 --> 0:16:39.960 Nation By now, you probably don't need much help in 0:16:40.000 --> 0:16:42.480 putting two and two together because the voice you're hearing 0:16:42.520 --> 0:16:45.880 on those ads is none other than the ABC's Tony Armstrong. 0:16:47.160 --> 0:16:50.040 And why was this such a scandal? Well, host Jeanine 0:16:50.040 --> 0:16:51.480 Parrot explains. 0:16:51.960 --> 0:16:55.800 Now, there are strict rules around ABC staff doing external work, 0:16:56.040 --> 0:16:58.280 and the rules get tighter the more famous you are, 0:16:58.400 --> 0:17:02.120 with the ABC stipulating that any external work by a 0:17:02.200 --> 0:17:04.080 high profile presenter. 0:17:04.160 --> 0:17:05.600 Is very high risk. 0:17:06.400 --> 0:17:10.359 Now, Tony's arguably one of the ABC's biggest stars. He's 0:17:10.400 --> 0:17:13.600 not only on the breakfast TV couch. In recent months, 0:17:13.640 --> 0:17:16.880 he's appeared at night on a new sports show. He's 0:17:16.920 --> 0:17:20.679 one of many appearing in ABC news promos and the 0:17:20.720 --> 0:17:23.800 face of his own five part series, So come with me. 0:17:23.800 --> 0:17:26.840 On my Hunt for Our Most Extraordinary Things. Let's go. 0:17:29.600 --> 0:17:32.359 So we were stunned when we got confirmation that Tony 0:17:32.560 --> 0:17:34.760 was selling an insurance company as well. 0:17:35.840 --> 0:17:40.440 And Perrot finished the segment by concluding, how any. 0:17:40.240 --> 0:17:43.119 ABC reporter can voice a commercial for one of the 0:17:43.119 --> 0:17:46.239 biggest brands in Australia and not think that is a 0:17:46.240 --> 0:17:49.399 conflict is beyond us. If this is not a breach 0:17:49.440 --> 0:17:52.240 of the guidelines on external work, which says you must 0:17:52.280 --> 0:17:55.439 seek approval from above, we don't know what is. 0:17:56.960 --> 0:17:59.800 It isn't hard to see that a high profile a 0:18:00.000 --> 0:18:04.399 BBC program criticizing a high profile ABC host would create headlines. 0:18:04.800 --> 0:18:08.000 The news was covered by Seven News, The Australian US 0:18:08.000 --> 0:18:11.960 Here at Sky and many more mainstream outlets, but soon 0:18:12.040 --> 0:18:15.360 the ABC was hitting back because News director Justin Stevens 0:18:15.440 --> 0:18:18.320 was less concerned about whether the guidelines had been breached 0:18:18.720 --> 0:18:22.600 and more concerned about the backlash itself, and The Guardian 0:18:22.680 --> 0:18:25.200 dutifully pushed this narrative for its mates at the ABC. 0:18:25.680 --> 0:18:28.720 They wrote, ABC News director calls out racist attacks on 0:18:28.760 --> 0:18:34.560 Tony Armstrong and criticizers inflammatory mainstream media. The ABC News 0:18:34.600 --> 0:18:37.600 director Justin Stevens has called out the racist abuse Tony 0:18:37.720 --> 0:18:41.680 Armstrong has received, saying the Indigenous presenter has been targeted 0:18:41.680 --> 0:18:44.720 on social media and in the comments section of news 0:18:44.720 --> 0:18:49.480 sites in a despicable way. Ironically, the criticism of the 0:18:49.560 --> 0:18:53.280 news coverage led to attacks on the host of Media Watch, 0:18:53.359 --> 0:18:56.760 Jeannin Perrott, as well, like in this radical left wing 0:18:56.800 --> 0:19:00.520 website Pedestrian, which plastered a large photo of next to 0:19:00.560 --> 0:19:05.399 this headline. Tony Armstrong was spammed with racist abuse after 0:19:05.480 --> 0:19:10.080 his own employer, the ABC, ran a hit piece. Now, 0:19:10.160 --> 0:19:13.560 Armstrong did receive racist abuse after the Media Watch episode, 0:19:13.640 --> 0:19:17.280 and he actually took to Instagram to share specific phrases 0:19:17.320 --> 0:19:21.480 he received, and they were disgusting and honestly pretty evil stuff. 0:19:21.920 --> 0:19:24.920 Two things can be true at once, though people posting 0:19:25.040 --> 0:19:28.399 racist comments are despicable, and at the same time, Media 0:19:28.440 --> 0:19:32.320 Watch should be free to critique high profile talent, particularly 0:19:32.359 --> 0:19:34.800 when the criticism had nothing to do with his race. 0:19:35.440 --> 0:19:38.800 Is the argument from Justin Stevens really that because there 0:19:38.800 --> 0:19:41.920 are awful people out there who will comment on Armstrong's race, 0:19:42.240 --> 0:19:45.480 that he has immunity from scrutiny. Let's bring the panel 0:19:45.480 --> 0:19:49.479 back into discuss Sophie Elsworth. You've been across this story. 0:19:49.960 --> 0:19:52.399 It's one which I think it's pulled the ABC in 0:19:52.520 --> 0:19:56.280 multiple directions. The main thing is I thought Media Watch 0:19:56.320 --> 0:20:01.399 did a rather good and fair job this story, and 0:20:01.480 --> 0:20:07.800 it's actually what the program's supposed to be doing exactly 0:20:07.880 --> 0:20:08.440 right Jack. 0:20:08.800 --> 0:20:14.320 But obviously this draws intense criticism from some given that 0:20:14.400 --> 0:20:17.359 Tony Armstrong is an indigenous presenter and one of their 0:20:17.359 --> 0:20:21.240 most high profile presenters. It doesn't matter who the presenter is, 0:20:21.720 --> 0:20:24.159 their gender, their race, or whatever it may be. 0:20:24.760 --> 0:20:25.320 If they have. 0:20:25.359 --> 0:20:29.000 Commercial deals on the side, this can be a problem 0:20:29.080 --> 0:20:33.520 for the public broadcaster and the reporter, journalist, host, or 0:20:33.560 --> 0:20:36.880 whoever it may be must disclose this to the ABC, 0:20:37.600 --> 0:20:41.480 and from the report of Media Watch, mister Armstrong failed. 0:20:41.119 --> 0:20:41.840 To do so. 0:20:41.840 --> 0:20:45.000 So it's a worthy story. But as for the abuse 0:20:45.080 --> 0:20:48.480 on social media, appalling and no one would think that 0:20:48.640 --> 0:20:52.320 is acceptable. But you know, this is a problem for 0:20:52.400 --> 0:20:55.399 the ABC too because they put out that racism report 0:20:55.480 --> 0:20:58.240 earlier in the week which said they would call out 0:20:58.320 --> 0:21:01.920 racist abuse towards their journalists, so they had to act 0:21:02.119 --> 0:21:04.440 very swiftly after this report came out. 0:21:05.200 --> 0:21:06.520 Yeah, Louise, what are your thoughts? 0:21:08.720 --> 0:21:11.080 Well, I agree with Sophie. I think that racism is 0:21:11.160 --> 0:21:13.560 the number one topic it seems of the ABC at 0:21:13.600 --> 0:21:15.359 the moment. But also they clearly need to talk to 0:21:15.400 --> 0:21:17.760 their high profile presenters and really fill at them to 0:21:17.800 --> 0:21:19.520 say have you got deals or have you not got 0:21:19.520 --> 0:21:22.320 deals because we don't condone them. They're very high risk 0:21:22.400 --> 0:21:25.919 as an employment contract. Very clearly states a lot of 0:21:25.920 --> 0:21:29.040 commercial TV presenters have come unstuck with deals on the 0:21:29.119 --> 0:21:30.920 side and in a bit to sort of, you know, 0:21:31.200 --> 0:21:34.439 make some money. So the ABC clearly have not become 0:21:34.480 --> 0:21:37.000 down hard enough on their presenters to say don't do this. 0:21:37.119 --> 0:21:39.240 It's not a good look for the public broadcaster. The 0:21:39.320 --> 0:21:40.879 taxpayer will not be impressed. 0:21:41.600 --> 0:21:44.560 Yep, well said, Well, now, two stories of the week 0:21:44.600 --> 0:21:49.600 and Sophie elsewheth, Let's start with you, Jack. 0:21:49.640 --> 0:21:53.520 There's a cracking story in the Daily Telegraph spat between 0:21:53.640 --> 0:21:58.360 Media Watch host Paul Barry and investigative reporter Mark Willersy 0:21:58.440 --> 0:22:01.600 on a report that ABC Media Watch did on some 0:22:01.680 --> 0:22:06.280