Speaker 1: Anette, Welcome to Maam. First of all, how are you going? Oh?
Speaker 2: That is such a big question.
Speaker 1: When journalist Antonette ler Toofe was fired from her casual
Speaker 1: job at ABC Local Radio purportedly for sharing a Human
Speaker 1: Rights Watch post, she could have just let it go
Speaker 1: and moved on, but instead she chose to fight, and
Speaker 1: her landmark win against the ABC has implications not just
Speaker 1: for the rights of casual workers, but for how all
Speaker 1: journalists in Australia report on GAZA.
Speaker 2: I am relieved, I'm exhausted, I'm a bit shelf shocked.
Speaker 2: I guess I knew that this was significant, significant for
Speaker 2: a bunch of reasons, but I didn't quite anticipate just
Speaker 2: kind of the amount of shock waves and conversations that
Speaker 2: it would inspire around the country but also around the world.
Speaker 2: And a little bit exposed.
Speaker 1: Her case laid bare the efforts of lobby groups and
Speaker 1: how those who should be upholding independence and impartiality failed,
Speaker 1: with the judge finding senior ABC managers had panicked after
Speaker 1: an orchestrated campaign by pro Israel lobbyists to have Miss
Speaker 1: Latouff taken off air. I'm Ruby Jones and you're listening
Speaker 1: to seven Am Today, co founder of at Media and
Speaker 1: applicant in the legal case against the ABC and Network
Speaker 1: two on why she fought at the future of journalism
Speaker 1: in Australia. It's Thursday, July tenth, an Tonette. I wondered
Speaker 1: if you could perhaps just take me back to where
Speaker 1: all of this began, the day that you were fired
Speaker 1: from the ABC. What happened?
Speaker 2: So I was contracted a short stint before Christmas to
Speaker 2: do ABC Sydney local radio. So this is outside of
Speaker 2: the remit of news and current affairs. I had been
Speaker 2: a freelance journalist for a few years, so it wasn't
Speaker 2: uncommon for me to be called in to go and
Speaker 2: do local radio. And so it was day three in
Speaker 2: which I was called into a room with my managers,
Speaker 2: three of them that essentially fired on the spot, and
Speaker 2: told to get my bags and leave. I was told
Speaker 2: at the time it was for a Human Rights Watch post,
Speaker 2: but I had also been made to wear a couple
Speaker 2: of days prior that. As soon as I had walked
Speaker 2: in it to the ABC, there was an email campaign,
Speaker 2: lots and lots of complaints to the ABC board and
Speaker 2: management about ever hiring me.
Speaker 3: The paper ob tenned dozens of leaked messages from a
Speaker 3: WhatsApp group called Lawyers for Israel, whose members route to
Speaker 3: ABC calling for Latouf to be sacked and threatening legal
Speaker 3: action if she wasn't.
Speaker 2: And it was subsequently established by a leak from two
Speaker 2: WhatsApp groups, but the one that's referred to most as
Speaker 2: Lawyers for Israel. And these were lawyers and barristers and
Speaker 2: heads of organizations or orchestrating to put pressure on the
Speaker 2: ABC to fire me because they didn't like my views
Speaker 2: on Gaza.
Speaker 4: Antoinette Latoufe was sacked this afternoon, as she should have
Speaker 4: been for her anti Israel social media posts. Here's one
Speaker 4: of those posts.
Speaker 2: Have a listen, Israelis get killed, Palestinians just die. Language matters,
Speaker 2: Israelis are always killed. You can also use the word slaughtered,
Speaker 2: barbarica tas victims and terrorism when describing their tragic debts
Speaker 2: for Palestinians. Given the body can't exceeds ten thousand, best
Speaker 2: to keep it ambiguous.
Speaker 4: How the hell did she ever think she was going
Speaker 4: to keep a job at the ABC by doing that.
Speaker 2: I guess some people might think, oh, this has been
Speaker 2: a big deal, and this has been a lot of
Speaker 2: coverage and a lot of taxpayer dollars and legal fees
Speaker 2: and whatnot over what is a five day contract, And
Speaker 2: you know, to that, I would say it was never
Speaker 2: about five days. More about what my treatment said about
Speaker 2: the ABC's independence and also the implications for journalism more broadly,
Speaker 2: if the ABC, which is our best of the best,
Speaker 2: can't withstand pressure from external lobby groups at a time
Speaker 2: when we're witnessing an unfolding genocide.
Speaker 1: And as you said, you've worked at the ABC many times.
Speaker 1: You've been a journalist for a long time, for more
Speaker 1: than fifteen years, and as part of that you've covered
Speaker 1: court cases, and so you would know, as many journalists
Speaker 1: would know, that in taking legal action against the ABC,
Speaker 1: you're doing something that I think has the potential to
Speaker 1: publicly define you, at least to some people. So when
Speaker 1: you were weighing up whether to take this action, how
Speaker 1: did you decide that doing this would be worth the fight?
Speaker 2: That's a really good question, because you are right as
Speaker 2: a journalist and you cover court proceedings or you cover
Speaker 2: defamation or whatever it is, you know it's a very
Speaker 2: taxing and sometimes unduly unfair process, particularly on a woman
Speaker 2: or someone from a minority in the way that they're
Speaker 2: treated or represented. I think what I decided to do
Speaker 2: was I knew that I would have to take hits.
Speaker 2: I would have to take hits from tabloid press, I
Speaker 2: would have to take huge financial hits because the phone
Speaker 2: stopped bringing, the work stopped coming in as a freelancer.
Speaker 2: But I guess I was driven because I knew that
Speaker 2: this gonna sound so cheesy, but honestly, it's how I
Speaker 2: was feeling that this is something that was far more
Speaker 2: significant than just myself. That this was for the integrity
Speaker 2: of our taxpayer funded public broadcaster. This was because I
Speaker 2: had a position to do something to hold somebody accountable
Speaker 2: when people feel really helpless with witnessing the human rights
Speaker 2: atrocities daily ongoing in Gaza, and that anything that I suffered,
Speaker 2: I'd be able to cop because the greater benefit and
Speaker 2: the public benefit would be And I know that makes
Speaker 2: me sound like I want to be some mother Theresa,
Speaker 2: but like, if this was just an individual workplace grievance,
Speaker 2: Like if it was just me and a manager and
Speaker 2: we didn't get along and they were a bit rude
Speaker 2: and someone bullied me, I probably would not have litigated.
Speaker 2: But given the context, and given the time in which
Speaker 2: we're in, I just felt it was more significant than
Speaker 2: myself and I.
Speaker 1: Want to go through the trial blow for blow. We
Speaker 1: all watched it play out. There was an incredible scrutiny
Speaker 1: on your case. But I think one of the big
Speaker 1: questions that I have for you is that after sitting
Speaker 1: there and seeing all of those emails and messages that
Speaker 1: were sent between people at the very top of the ABC,
Speaker 1: what do you think now about the way that the
Speaker 1: public broadcaster.
Speaker 2: Operates based on the actions and the words and the
Speaker 2: testimonies of that board. I mean absolutely appalling, not just
Speaker 2: in its treatment of me, in the descriptions of.
Speaker 5: Me asked about latouf Ida, Buttro's told the court in
Speaker 5: relation to the Israel Garza conflict she was an.
Speaker 2: Activist wishing COVID it on me.
Speaker 5: In an email, the ABC chair asked whether the two
Speaker 5: had been replaced, suggesting she could get COVID or a
Speaker 5: stomach upset.
Speaker 2: Referring to me as the Antoinette issue. We have an
Speaker 2: Antoinette issue, like appalling, but just in terms of governance
Speaker 2: of a board, like a real lack of integrity, lack
Speaker 2: of leadership. They had eighteen months ample opportunity, and instead
Speaker 2: of fixing it, the doubling and tripling down has done
Speaker 2: irreparable damage to those particular individuals and their legacies, but
Speaker 2: also to the organization writ large.
Speaker 1: After the break, my journalists are leading user rooms to
Speaker 1: go independent.
Speaker 2: Today, the court has found that punishing someone for sharing
Speaker 2: facts about these war crimes is also illegal. I was
Speaker 2: punished my political opinion. I won't be taking any questions.
Speaker 2: I'll have more to say in due time.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 1: And the federal court found that the ABC contravened the
Speaker 1: fair work at by terminating your employment for reasons, including
Speaker 1: that you held a political opinion opposing the Israeli military
Speaker 1: campaign in Gaza. So when that judgment came down, what
Speaker 1: was that like for you in court?
Speaker 2: I mean, it was vindicating. I always knew that that's
Speaker 2: why I was treated the way I was treated. I
Speaker 2: always knew that I had done absolutely nothing wrong, that
Speaker 2: sharing the Human Rights Watch post wasn't a breach of
Speaker 2: a management directive, and so I didn't feel this great
Speaker 2: relief as I like, ah, you know, it was more
Speaker 2: just like I felt the next vindication, but sadness. Sadness
Speaker 2: that millions of dollars were spent dragging me through the mud,
Speaker 2: and I think always assuming that I would just back
Speaker 2: off and that they would get away with it.
Speaker 1: And none of the seeing A management who were involved
Speaker 1: in your case are at the ABC anymore at about
Speaker 1: true system there David Anderson, Grisoloda Taylor, but the current chair,
Speaker 1: Kim Williams, he spoke in the Press Club. He said
Speaker 1: that you were not sacked.
Speaker 6: Miss Lettoof was not dismissed. Miss Latoof was on our five.
Speaker 6: Miss Latouff had a five day contract and under that
Speaker 6: contract the contract was brought to a close at the
Speaker 6: end of the third day.
Speaker 1: What does that say to you about the way that
Speaker 1: the people who are currently at the ABC are thinking
Speaker 1: about what happened and where the organization sits now.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So Kim Williams obviously came in after all of this,
Speaker 2: and there was a lot of hope on outside that
Speaker 2: he would come in and fix it up. He had
Speaker 2: this kind of pr opportunity to go, this is a
Speaker 2: new leadership, this is a new year. We're going to
Speaker 2: do things differently. So when he stood at the National
Speaker 2: Press Club and reiterated that I wasn't sacked despite the
Speaker 2: Fairwork Commission finding that I was sacked. We were like, oh,
Speaker 2: and then he was like and unlike Miss Latooth.
Speaker 6: We have been impeccably silent about the matter, unlike Miss
Speaker 6: Latoof and her representatives who seem to have been devoted
Speaker 6: to sharing on a regular basis with the media.
Speaker 2: And so then try to kind of like categorize me
Speaker 2: as like why is she still talking? Like why is
Speaker 2: she complaining? And so hearing kind of that derision in
Speaker 2: his voice and him taking that stand really signaled to me, well,
Speaker 2: the ABC hasn't learnt anything, it's not sorry about anything,
Speaker 2: and it's not being held accountable.
Speaker 1: And to speak more broadly, across the Australian media landscape,
Speaker 1: how common do you think it is for journalists to
Speaker 1: have their reporting and their social media surveiled scrutinized when
Speaker 1: it comes to the war at Gaza? What kind of
Speaker 1: stories have you heard from people in the last two years?
Speaker 2: Oh? Yeah, across the board. And it's not only in
Speaker 2: the media, obviously, it's not only at the ABC. It's
Speaker 2: certainly not only in the media. It's across all sectors.
Speaker 2: There's a level of surveillance and in pinging on freedom
Speaker 2: of political opinion and freedom to assemble and freedom of speech,
Speaker 2: even though I know that that's not a constitutionally you know,
Speaker 2: enshrined right. Unlike the United States, we have seen a
Speaker 2: stifling of an ability to voice, discuss, despair, concern about
Speaker 2: what we're witnessing, and have witnessed live streams on our
Speaker 2: phone in four K for the past two years. We've
Speaker 2: seen you overreach and meddling in creative institutes, Academics bullied
Speaker 2: out of jobs or stood down, doctors investigated by opera
Speaker 2: after bogus claims. You know, doctors who say, you know,
Speaker 2: we believe doctors and aid workers and healthcare workers shouldn't
Speaker 2: be killed. But yes, I've heard currentless stories across the
Speaker 2: industry of people either leaving because they can't bear it,
Speaker 2: being pushed out, or just feeling really despondent about the
Speaker 2: future of the media and their role in it. Because
Speaker 2: we're meant to give a voice to the voiceless, We're
Speaker 2: meant to speak truth to power. Except it seems as
Speaker 2: though we can do this on like all topics, except this.
Speaker 2: There's a big asterisk here. And yeah, and I guess
Speaker 2: that's part of why Janfran and I have started an
Speaker 2: independent media company we saw many of our friends and
Speaker 2: colleagues just leave in despair, and we thought, well, no,
Speaker 2: we don't want to We don't want to go because
Speaker 2: you know, then, I guess those people in those WhatsApp
Speaker 2: groups get what they want. They get us silenced and
Speaker 2: sacked and unemployed. And so we are seeing a few
Speaker 2: people trying to start independent offshoots.
Speaker 1: Speaking of the WhatsApp groups, You've spoken about the role
Speaker 1: of lobbyists several times, and I just wonder over the
Speaker 1: course of the last couple of years, what you have taken,
Speaker 1: what you've learned about how lobbying operates in practice.
Speaker 2: Well, like, lobbyists can lobby, it's what they do right,
Speaker 2: And there are lobbyists of all stripes. There are lobbyists
Speaker 2: across industries, across religious groups, across business groups, across government.
Speaker 2: Opposition like ABC has always been lobbied. It's not something
Speaker 2: that the pro Israel camp created. It's just when the
Speaker 2: lobbyists are the loudest and only voice heard that I
Speaker 2: think we have a real problem. And also when it
Speaker 2: trickles down to audiences where they're like, we can see
Speaker 2: that influence the way in which stories are framed and
Speaker 2: who we humanize, and who we go to as an
Speaker 2: authority and whose lives we deem more important, and the
Speaker 2: adjectives we use to describe the loss of one life
Speaker 2: as opposed to the loss of twenty thousand other lives.
Speaker 2: I think audiences are rightly skeptical and if the ABC
Speaker 2: wants to remain relevant and trusted as the most trusted
Speaker 2: news source in the world, it needs to show that
Speaker 2: it can withstand lobbying of any form.
Speaker 1: And I just had one final question. There's been a
Speaker 1: lot of commentary around what makes a person a journalist
Speaker 1: or an activist, and I wonder if you have thoughts
Speaker 1: on who decides where that line is and what it's
Speaker 1: based on.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, I have so many thoughts on that. It's so
Speaker 2: funny because when the Murdoch Press want to do something
Speaker 2: like they'll call it a campaign. So they're like, we
Speaker 2: have a campaign to get work from home people, employees
Speaker 2: back to the office, back to the CBD because CBD
Speaker 2: cafes are struggling, And they're like, oh, that's cute. You
Speaker 2: call that a campaign. Is that activism journalism? There are
Speaker 2: certain topics in which we accept the journalists are allowed
Speaker 2: to have an opinion on now we accept that climate
Speaker 2: changing systs. You know, for a long time, sections of
Speaker 2: the press denied it. And so if a journalist has
Speaker 2: views critical of polluters, that's not considered activism journalism. And
Speaker 2: so I see that that framing usually reserved for those
Speaker 2: who have the least access to power. And so for me,
Speaker 2: as a woman, and as a woman of an Arab background,
Speaker 2: it's a way to discredit me, calling me an activist journalist,
Speaker 2: irrespective of my years and years of experience across many
Speaker 2: outlets and all these awards, and I've even started a
Speaker 2: media not for profit and I've done all of these
Speaker 2: things because I dare to have a political opinion rooted
Speaker 2: in facts. Oh well, we can't trust her because she's
Speaker 2: an activist journalist, and it's just not applied as liberally
Speaker 2: to other journal So I think it's a convenient label
Speaker 2: that tries to discredit somebody who either has a different
Speaker 2: opinion or is getting too close to challenging power that
Speaker 2: wants to remain unchallenged. That's my view.
Speaker 1: And Tonette, thank you for your time.
Speaker 2: Thank you, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: You can hear more of Anette Latoof's work on the podcast.
Speaker 1: We used to be journos from ET Media. We asked
Speaker 1: Kim Williams to speak with us for this episode, but
Speaker 1: he declined. In a public statement, current ABC Managing director
Speaker 1: Hugh Marx said, we regret how the decision to remove
Speaker 1: Miss Latoof from air was handled and the distress occasioned her.
Speaker 1: We extend our sincere apologies to Miss Latouf and wish
Speaker 1: her well in her future endeavors. Also in the news today,
Speaker 1: the Ambonezi government says it's urgently seeking clarity after US
Speaker 1: President Donald Trump warned countries can expect two hundred percent
Speaker 1: tariffs on all pharmaceutical imports. In twenty twenty four, Australia
Speaker 1: exported roughly two point one billion dollars of medicinal and
Speaker 1: pharmaceutical products to the United States, and Treasurer Jim Chalmers
Speaker 1: says he's seeking more detail on Trump's announcement. And Victoria's
Speaker 1: Do Anti Hate Task Force has met for the first
Speaker 1: time following a series of incidents in Melbourne, including the
Speaker 1: fire bombing of the East Melbourne Synagogue. Premier Decenter Alan
Speaker 1: says the group has heard from the Chief Commissioner of
Speaker 1: Victoria Police, who says the force is ready to act
Speaker 1: and respond to the incidents in a strong manner. I'm
Speaker 1: Ruby Jones. This is seven am. Thanks for listening.