WEBVTT - The ABC’s ‘Antoinette problem’

0:00:05.000 --> 0:00:08.320
<v Speaker 1>From the Australian. Here's what's on the front. I'm Christian Amio.

0:00:08.600 --> 0:00:16.320
<v Speaker 1>It's Wednesday, February five. Joe Halen resigned from her position

0:00:16.400 --> 0:00:20.200
<v Speaker 1>as new South Wales Transport Minister after days of controversy

0:00:20.239 --> 0:00:24.799
<v Speaker 1>surrounding her use of taxpayer funded car services for personal travel.

0:00:25.680 --> 0:00:29.319
<v Speaker 2>As I said on Sunday, I've made some mistakes. I

0:00:29.400 --> 0:00:31.960
<v Speaker 2>did not break the rules, but I acknowledge that that's

0:00:32.000 --> 0:00:33.040
<v Speaker 2>not the only test here.

0:00:36.440 --> 0:00:39.199
<v Speaker 1>The government has banned deep seak on its systems and

0:00:39.240 --> 0:00:44.080
<v Speaker 1>devices on national security grounds. An assessment by intelligence officials

0:00:44.080 --> 0:00:48.440
<v Speaker 1>found the Chinese Generative AI platform poses an unacceptable risk.

0:00:49.040 --> 0:00:51.199
<v Speaker 1>You can read those stories right now at the Australian

0:00:51.240 --> 0:00:58.080
<v Speaker 1>dot com dot au. Freelance journalist Antoinette Latouffe broke down

0:00:58.120 --> 0:01:01.280
<v Speaker 1>in court on Tuesday as she reflected on her sacking

0:01:01.400 --> 0:01:04.839
<v Speaker 1>by the ABC over a social media post they say

0:01:05.040 --> 0:01:18.199
<v Speaker 1>breached their editorial standards. That's today's episode. In late twenty

0:01:18.240 --> 0:01:22.320
<v Speaker 1>twenty three, the ABC's managing director, David Anderson, scrolled through

0:01:22.360 --> 0:01:25.520
<v Speaker 1>the social media profiles of a presenter filling in on

0:01:25.560 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 1>the broadcaster's Sydney Morning radio program. He picked up his

0:01:29.760 --> 0:01:34.080
<v Speaker 1>phone and texted a colleague David Anderson's words are being

0:01:34.080 --> 0:01:35.360
<v Speaker 1>read by a voice actor.

0:01:36.440 --> 0:01:39.240
<v Speaker 3>I think we have an Antonette issue. Her socials are

0:01:39.280 --> 0:01:40.800
<v Speaker 3>full of anti Semitic hatred.

0:01:41.880 --> 0:01:46.200
<v Speaker 1>That issue was resolved quickly. Antoinette Latoufe was sacked three

0:01:46.280 --> 0:01:50.800
<v Speaker 1>days into her week long contract, and on Wednesday David

0:01:50.800 --> 0:01:53.440
<v Speaker 1>Anderson will enter the witness box in the Federal Court

0:01:53.480 --> 0:01:59.720
<v Speaker 1>in Sydney to explain the public broadcaster's actions. Lebanese Australian

0:01:59.760 --> 0:02:04.040
<v Speaker 1>jour Antoinette Latouf is now suing the ABC in a

0:02:04.080 --> 0:02:07.880
<v Speaker 1>case that goes to the far Antoinette Latouf was taken

0:02:07.920 --> 0:02:10.480
<v Speaker 1>off the air at the ABC local radio branch in

0:02:10.600 --> 0:02:14.360
<v Speaker 1>late twenty twenty three. The ABC said her social media

0:02:14.400 --> 0:02:18.079
<v Speaker 1>posts about the Israel Garza war, posted during that radio

0:02:18.120 --> 0:02:23.160
<v Speaker 1>engagement were in breach of their editorial policy. On December nineteen,

0:02:23.480 --> 0:02:26.880
<v Speaker 1>Latouf shared an Instagram post by Human Rights Watch to

0:02:26.960 --> 0:02:30.720
<v Speaker 1>her personal profile. That post is being read by a

0:02:30.800 --> 0:02:31.760
<v Speaker 1>voice actor.

0:02:32.560 --> 0:02:35.480
<v Speaker 4>Human Rights Watch reporting starvation as a tool of war.

0:02:36.919 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 1>The ABC says Latouf was let go because of that post,

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:43.960
<v Speaker 1>but it says she wasn't technically sacked because they paid

0:02:44.040 --> 0:02:47.880
<v Speaker 1>her for the full five days. But in June, the

0:02:47.919 --> 0:02:51.920
<v Speaker 1>Fair Work Commission found in favor of Latouf. The Commission's

0:02:51.919 --> 0:02:56.520
<v Speaker 1>deputy president, Jared Boyce, said the employment relationship between Latouf

0:02:56.560 --> 0:03:00.520
<v Speaker 1>and the ABC was terminated at the ABC's in un initiative.

0:03:01.639 --> 0:03:06.840
<v Speaker 1>Later in June, Latoufe sued. Miss Latoof said the mediation

0:03:06.960 --> 0:03:09.840
<v Speaker 1>had been unsuccessful, and she vowed to fight on and

0:03:09.880 --> 0:03:14.359
<v Speaker 1>take the case to trial through the federal court. As

0:03:14.400 --> 0:03:18.680
<v Speaker 1>the proceedings got underway on Monday, correspondence between former ABC

0:03:18.880 --> 0:03:23.040
<v Speaker 1>chair Oute Buttero's and managing director David Anderson were read

0:03:23.120 --> 0:03:26.800
<v Speaker 1>in court. The emails showed Buttros had pushed for the

0:03:26.800 --> 0:03:30.040
<v Speaker 1>fill in radio host to be taken off air following

0:03:30.080 --> 0:03:33.880
<v Speaker 1>complaints about her social media posts by a pro Israel group.

0:03:34.480 --> 0:03:37.160
<v Speaker 1>That correspondence is being read by voice actors.

0:03:39.560 --> 0:03:43.080
<v Speaker 2>Has Antoinette been replaced? I'm over getting emails about her.

0:03:44.200 --> 0:03:47.560
<v Speaker 3>Antoinette will finish up on Friday. It's a managed exit

0:03:47.560 --> 0:03:51.160
<v Speaker 3>given the situation. I can explain more tomorrow. Plan to

0:03:51.200 --> 0:03:54.600
<v Speaker 3>respond to all those who have emailed on Friday afternoon.

0:03:55.520 --> 0:03:57.680
<v Speaker 2>Why can't she come down with flu or covid or

0:03:57.720 --> 0:04:01.440
<v Speaker 2>a stomach upset? We owe her nothing. We're copying criticism

0:04:01.440 --> 0:04:04.680
<v Speaker 2>because she wasn't honest when she was appointed managed exit.

0:04:04.800 --> 0:04:08.080
<v Speaker 2>Really we should be in damage control, not managed exit,

0:04:08.160 --> 0:04:08.600
<v Speaker 2>s David.

0:04:11.680 --> 0:04:14.840
<v Speaker 1>The names of nine people who complained about Latouf's social

0:04:14.880 --> 0:04:18.080
<v Speaker 1>media activity were suppressed by a federal court judge for

0:04:18.160 --> 0:04:21.839
<v Speaker 1>ten years on Monday, following a surprise application by barrister

0:04:21.920 --> 0:04:27.000
<v Speaker 1>Sukrasanthu SC and solicitor Rebecca Giles. The judge said those

0:04:27.040 --> 0:04:30.320
<v Speaker 1>people could be vilified and harassed if their identities were

0:04:30.360 --> 0:04:35.040
<v Speaker 1>made public. Antoinette, Latouf's barrister, Ogi Fagear, said his client

0:04:35.120 --> 0:04:38.440
<v Speaker 1>had been targeted because of her personal views, not her

0:04:38.520 --> 0:04:42.880
<v Speaker 1>professional conduct, and said Buttros and Anderson had acquiesced to

0:04:42.920 --> 0:04:45.360
<v Speaker 1>complaints made by the Pro Israel group.

0:04:46.520 --> 0:04:48.560
<v Speaker 5>So far as the evidence goes, they did not at

0:04:48.600 --> 0:04:52.400
<v Speaker 5>any stage involve any human resources adviser, They did not

0:04:52.440 --> 0:04:55.320
<v Speaker 5>at any point seek legal advice, and we will say

0:04:55.320 --> 0:04:58.640
<v Speaker 5>they completely and utterly ignored the provisions of their enterprise

0:04:58.680 --> 0:05:01.560
<v Speaker 5>agreement and their own dealing with these issues.

0:05:02.960 --> 0:05:06.479
<v Speaker 1>James, what is this actually about? Is this case a

0:05:06.560 --> 0:05:12.200
<v Speaker 1>question of journalistic ethics or of the ABC's human resource management,

0:05:12.760 --> 0:05:14.400
<v Speaker 1>or is it something else altogether?

0:05:15.080 --> 0:05:19.520
<v Speaker 6>I think certainly journalism ethics have become part of this hearing,

0:05:20.240 --> 0:05:23.880
<v Speaker 6>although I think when you strip it back, it's still

0:05:24.279 --> 0:05:30.360
<v Speaker 6>essentially a tale about management or mismanagement of a staff's

0:05:30.360 --> 0:05:33.040
<v Speaker 6>employment and their employment conditions.

0:05:33.680 --> 0:05:36.000
<v Speaker 1>James Madden is The Australian's Media editor.

0:05:36.920 --> 0:05:41.520
<v Speaker 6>At its heart, the question is did Antoinette Latouf breach

0:05:42.120 --> 0:05:46.440
<v Speaker 6>the conditions of her employment by posting to social media

0:05:47.040 --> 0:05:53.280
<v Speaker 6>something that the ABC considered was inappropriate. Latouf said parameters

0:05:53.279 --> 0:05:56.679
<v Speaker 6>were established between her and the content director of the station,

0:05:56.800 --> 0:06:00.279
<v Speaker 6>Elizabeth Green, but at no time was the world word

0:06:00.360 --> 0:06:03.479
<v Speaker 6>fair and balanced used in relation to any social media

0:06:03.520 --> 0:06:08.680
<v Speaker 6>postings that she may or may not choose to put online. Obviously,

0:06:08.760 --> 0:06:13.520
<v Speaker 6>their case rests on whether latoof breached her employment conditions,

0:06:13.960 --> 0:06:17.400
<v Speaker 6>although it remains contentious as to what they actually were.

0:06:18.279 --> 0:06:23.120
<v Speaker 6>Latouf's argument about the HIW post in which it was

0:06:23.160 --> 0:06:26.640
<v Speaker 6>claimed that Israeli was using starvation as a tool of

0:06:26.720 --> 0:06:31.200
<v Speaker 6>war certainly has some merit, if only because the ABC

0:06:31.480 --> 0:06:36.719
<v Speaker 6>itself had already highlighted that claim by the HIW in

0:06:36.760 --> 0:06:39.919
<v Speaker 6>one of its earlier news reports. So for the ABC

0:06:40.600 --> 0:06:45.479
<v Speaker 6>to win this unlawful termination case, it has to essentially

0:06:45.520 --> 0:06:49.680
<v Speaker 6>concede that it was wrong to run a story about

0:06:49.680 --> 0:06:51.640
<v Speaker 6>that post earlier in the week.

0:06:55.040 --> 0:06:57.840
<v Speaker 1>Coming up Antoinete Latouf's side of the story in her

0:06:57.839 --> 0:07:17.440
<v Speaker 1>own words. Antoinette Latouf spent two days in the witness

0:07:17.440 --> 0:07:20.960
<v Speaker 1>box of court Room sixteen A at Sydney's Federal Law Courts.

0:07:21.640 --> 0:07:24.880
<v Speaker 1>Under cross examination by the ABC's silk Ian Neil sc

0:07:25.480 --> 0:07:29.720
<v Speaker 1>Latouf conceded her posts were controversial, but maintained they were

0:07:29.760 --> 0:07:34.120
<v Speaker 1>based on facts from reputable sources. A voice actor is

0:07:34.160 --> 0:07:35.640
<v Speaker 1>reading her words from court.

0:07:36.600 --> 0:07:39.640
<v Speaker 4>I don't share facts worrying if somebody might think it's controversial.

0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:43.160
<v Speaker 1>When she was quizzed by Neil on posts she made

0:07:43.200 --> 0:07:46.440
<v Speaker 1>earlier in twenty twenty three before her casual gig with

0:07:46.520 --> 0:07:51.520
<v Speaker 1>ABC Local Radio began, Latouf doubled down. Latouf admitted she

0:07:51.680 --> 0:07:55.360
<v Speaker 1>had called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanya, who the most

0:07:55.520 --> 0:07:59.440
<v Speaker 1>far right extremist in the nation's history, in those earlier posts,

0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:02.520
<v Speaker 1>and claimed and Israel had perpetuated.

0:08:02.320 --> 0:08:06.360
<v Speaker 4>The worst humanitarian crisis and violence against children in modern times.

0:08:08.280 --> 0:08:10.800
<v Speaker 4>As journalists, we don't operate on the basis of how

0:08:10.800 --> 0:08:14.600
<v Speaker 4>people may feel. When I share facts based on reputable sources,

0:08:14.680 --> 0:08:18.600
<v Speaker 4>I don't deem them controversial. If people don't accept these facts,

0:08:18.680 --> 0:08:21.760
<v Speaker 4>they can you can describe it however you like, but

0:08:21.920 --> 0:08:23.600
<v Speaker 4>I don't accept that premise.

0:08:25.760 --> 0:08:29.520
<v Speaker 1>The court heard. The ABC's content director, Elizabeth Green, asked

0:08:29.600 --> 0:08:32.520
<v Speaker 1>Latouf to tone down her social media activity from the

0:08:32.559 --> 0:08:36.679
<v Speaker 1>beginning of her five day fill instint on ABC Sydney Mornings.

0:08:37.640 --> 0:08:39.959
<v Speaker 4>I challenged it, Yes, I did, respectfully.

0:08:40.960 --> 0:08:43.760
<v Speaker 1>In her affidavit, Latouf said the pair came to an

0:08:43.760 --> 0:08:47.160
<v Speaker 1>agreement that she would only share social media posts containing

0:08:47.360 --> 0:08:50.480
<v Speaker 1>completely factual information from reputable sources.

0:08:51.240 --> 0:08:55.960
<v Speaker 4>No conjecture, no misinformation, just sharing information from reputable sources.

0:08:56.880 --> 0:08:59.680
<v Speaker 1>Latouf said she believed the Human Rights Watch post that

0:08:59.720 --> 0:09:02.600
<v Speaker 1>old timately led to her dismissal fell within the terms

0:09:02.679 --> 0:09:03.600
<v Speaker 1>of that agreement.

0:09:04.480 --> 0:09:06.720
<v Speaker 4>I had already seen it reported on the ABC and

0:09:06.800 --> 0:09:10.240
<v Speaker 4>the BBC. It was newsworthy. I decided if it was

0:09:10.240 --> 0:09:12.760
<v Speaker 4>good enough for the ABC and the BBC to post,

0:09:12.840 --> 0:09:14.520
<v Speaker 4>it was good enough for my social media.

0:09:15.600 --> 0:09:18.559
<v Speaker 1>Latouf agreed. When asked by ian Neil if the ABC

0:09:18.600 --> 0:09:22.160
<v Speaker 1>and the BBC had a responsibility to report that information.

0:09:22.880 --> 0:09:26.480
<v Speaker 1>She also conceded her engagement by the ABC didn't carry

0:09:26.520 --> 0:09:27.520
<v Speaker 1>the same requirement.

0:09:28.600 --> 0:09:30.400
<v Speaker 4>I was paid to be on a kind of lifestyle

0:09:30.480 --> 0:09:31.400
<v Speaker 4>magazine program.

0:09:32.600 --> 0:09:34.800
<v Speaker 1>On her way out of the building on December twenty

0:09:35.200 --> 0:09:39.080
<v Speaker 1>Latouf said she bumped into Elizabeth Green, who relayed through tears,

0:09:39.120 --> 0:09:42.320
<v Speaker 1>according to Latouf, that she'd been let go because the

0:09:42.400 --> 0:09:46.680
<v Speaker 1>post wasn't fair or balanced, but Latouf contends that was

0:09:46.800 --> 0:09:49.479
<v Speaker 1>never part of the agreement and asked.

0:09:49.120 --> 0:09:51.479
<v Speaker 4>Green, how do you balance starvation?

0:09:55.080 --> 0:09:58.600
<v Speaker 1>Antoinette Latouf became visibly upset at times during her cross

0:09:58.640 --> 0:10:03.280
<v Speaker 1>examination by ian Neel, especially when discussing the period following

0:10:03.280 --> 0:10:04.800
<v Speaker 1>her departure from the ABC.

0:10:06.320 --> 0:10:09.320
<v Speaker 4>I was like, was I being followed or did I like,

0:10:09.640 --> 0:10:12.800
<v Speaker 4>was that a coincidence? I couldn't. I don't know, and

0:10:12.880 --> 0:10:16.080
<v Speaker 4>I started to just question inspiral because I couldn't definitively

0:10:16.120 --> 0:10:18.560
<v Speaker 4>say whether I felt like I was being followed, and

0:10:18.600 --> 0:10:21.559
<v Speaker 4>I was terrified. I've never been scared to be out

0:10:21.600 --> 0:10:22.920
<v Speaker 4>in public the way I have been.

0:10:24.000 --> 0:10:27.439
<v Speaker 1>Latoof said her dismissal caused her to drink heavily, sometimes

0:10:27.520 --> 0:10:31.160
<v Speaker 1>until she passed out. She said the characterization of her

0:10:31.240 --> 0:10:36.160
<v Speaker 1>as insubordinate had rendered her unemployable. Asked if she characterized

0:10:36.200 --> 0:10:39.520
<v Speaker 1>herself as a poster girl for humanity and a free press,

0:10:39.960 --> 0:10:42.480
<v Speaker 1>Latoof said she was trying to clear her name as

0:10:42.520 --> 0:10:43.199
<v Speaker 1>a journalist.

0:10:44.240 --> 0:10:46.120
<v Speaker 4>I think my memory is I posted a video of

0:10:46.160 --> 0:10:49.440
<v Speaker 4>me really emotional, saying I never wanted to be I

0:10:49.480 --> 0:10:51.720
<v Speaker 4>never wanted to be this. I just wanted to be

0:10:51.720 --> 0:10:54.640
<v Speaker 4>able to do my job and exist safely. I didn't

0:10:54.679 --> 0:10:57.280
<v Speaker 4>come out to be this per like I just I

0:10:57.320 --> 0:11:00.400
<v Speaker 4>was on air talking about cats and Christmas pudding. I

0:11:00.400 --> 0:11:02.800
<v Speaker 4>didn't want any of this. I have values, but I

0:11:02.840 --> 0:11:04.559
<v Speaker 4>didn't want to be the face of this. When this

0:11:04.600 --> 0:11:05.400
<v Speaker 4>comes at such.

0:11:05.200 --> 0:11:10.040
<v Speaker 1>A cost, James, this legal action has come at the

0:11:10.120 --> 0:11:12.640
<v Speaker 1>end of a pretty rocky road for the ABC. It's

0:11:12.679 --> 0:11:15.720
<v Speaker 1>also happening at a time when media organizations are trying

0:11:15.800 --> 0:11:19.559
<v Speaker 1>to balance the personal profiles and platforms of their journalists,

0:11:19.559 --> 0:11:23.520
<v Speaker 1>particularly on social media, which they themselves fostered in the

0:11:23.559 --> 0:11:28.920
<v Speaker 1>early days of social media, with their obligations to fare reporting. What,

0:11:29.000 --> 0:11:31.600
<v Speaker 1>if anything, is there to be learned from this situation?

0:11:31.679 --> 0:11:32.199
<v Speaker 5>Do you think?

0:11:33.320 --> 0:11:37.400
<v Speaker 6>I don't think any media or organization has quite got

0:11:37.440 --> 0:11:41.920
<v Speaker 6>its head around the way its employees and its journalists

0:11:42.559 --> 0:11:46.120
<v Speaker 6>should use social media. In many ways, this is a

0:11:46.120 --> 0:11:51.800
<v Speaker 6>great test case of an organization's editorial policy versus its

0:11:51.840 --> 0:11:55.240
<v Speaker 6>social media policy, and that point was actually highlighted in

0:11:55.520 --> 0:11:59.960
<v Speaker 6>court on Tuesday. News organizations like to think they can

0:12:00.160 --> 0:12:04.080
<v Speaker 6>and should have great oversight of what its journalists post

0:12:04.120 --> 0:12:09.080
<v Speaker 6>on social media, but the reality is sometimes personal views

0:12:09.480 --> 0:12:15.320
<v Speaker 6>collide with the views of a news organization's idea of

0:12:15.640 --> 0:12:20.160
<v Speaker 6>what is appropriate in a journalistic sense. Many news editors

0:12:20.200 --> 0:12:24.800
<v Speaker 6>will tell you that, despite the initial rush to encourage

0:12:24.840 --> 0:12:28.840
<v Speaker 6>their staff to get on social media and promote news

0:12:28.840 --> 0:12:32.760
<v Speaker 6>brands on their personal accounts, life might be a lot

0:12:32.800 --> 0:12:38.480
<v Speaker 6>easier for news editors if their staff steered clear of

0:12:38.559 --> 0:12:45.760
<v Speaker 6>posting any political content at all on social media.

0:12:50.000 --> 0:12:54.840
<v Speaker 1>James Madden is The Australian's Media editor. ABC Managing director

0:12:54.920 --> 0:12:58.120
<v Speaker 1>David Anderson will enter the witness box today and former

0:12:58.200 --> 0:13:01.000
<v Speaker 1>chair out of Buttero's It's expected to give evidence later

0:13:01.080 --> 0:13:03.720
<v Speaker 1>in the week. The case returns to the Federal Court

0:13:03.760 --> 0:13:06.480
<v Speaker 1>on Wednesday. You can read all our teams reporting and

0:13:06.559 --> 0:13:09.440
<v Speaker 1>analysis right now at The Australian dot com dot au