WEBVTT - Trump’s suing the BBC. Should the ABC worry?

0:00:03.840 --> 0:00:06.800
<v Speaker 1>From The Australian. Here's what's on the front. I'm Claire Harvey.

0:00:06.880 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>It's Thursday, November thirteen, twenty twenty five. Former Prime Minister

0:00:13.440 --> 0:00:16.600
<v Speaker 1>Paul Ketting has blasted the outgoing head of the RSL

0:00:16.840 --> 0:00:20.800
<v Speaker 1>for his Remembrance Day speech. Greg Melick criticized the government's

0:00:20.880 --> 0:00:24.560
<v Speaker 1>lacks attitude to defense spending in the speech, but Keating

0:00:24.600 --> 0:00:27.520
<v Speaker 1>says he's got it wrong and is beating up the

0:00:27.560 --> 0:00:35.560
<v Speaker 1>military threat posed by China. Donald Trump says he'll sue

0:00:35.600 --> 0:00:39.479
<v Speaker 1>the BBC for a billion dollars and the UK public broadcasters,

0:00:39.520 --> 0:00:42.920
<v Speaker 1>two most senior executives have left their jobs in the

0:00:42.960 --> 0:00:45.720
<v Speaker 1>warshop from a drama. That's part of a pattern the

0:00:45.880 --> 0:00:49.720
<v Speaker 1>US presidents suing news organizations for what he says is

0:00:49.840 --> 0:00:54.760
<v Speaker 1>unfair and selective reporting. So what exactly did the BBC

0:00:54.960 --> 0:00:59.680
<v Speaker 1>do to enrage Trump and should Australia's own ABC be worried.

0:01:04.160 --> 0:01:06.800
<v Speaker 1>James Madden is The Australian's media editor and he is

0:01:06.880 --> 0:01:09.240
<v Speaker 1>joining me to talk about the threat that Donald Trump

0:01:09.319 --> 0:01:13.000
<v Speaker 1>has made to sue the BBC. James, Donald Trump has

0:01:13.040 --> 0:01:16.600
<v Speaker 1>given the BBC a deadline of Friday to apologize and

0:01:16.640 --> 0:01:18.920
<v Speaker 1>give him some money or he's going to launch a

0:01:19.000 --> 0:01:22.080
<v Speaker 1>legal suit in his home state of Florida. This is

0:01:22.120 --> 0:01:25.679
<v Speaker 1>all about the BBC selectively editing a speech that Trump

0:01:25.720 --> 0:01:29.520
<v Speaker 1>made in Washington, DC on January sixth, twenty twenty one,

0:01:30.040 --> 0:01:33.399
<v Speaker 1>to a crowd of people, some of whom later marched

0:01:33.400 --> 0:01:37.000
<v Speaker 1>down to the Capitol and staged a riot. What's the

0:01:37.200 --> 0:01:40.400
<v Speaker 1>essence of Trump's problem with what the BBC did.

0:01:40.840 --> 0:01:44.200
<v Speaker 2>Donald Trump is arguing that he's been defamed by the

0:01:44.200 --> 0:01:50.680
<v Speaker 2>BBC because the Panorama program effectively characterized his remarks as

0:01:50.680 --> 0:01:53.760
<v Speaker 2>a call to arms to the assembled crowd to march

0:01:53.760 --> 0:01:56.680
<v Speaker 2>on the Capitol and behave in a violent manner. The

0:01:56.680 --> 0:02:00.160
<v Speaker 2>remarks that Trump made on that day were misrepresent to

0:02:00.240 --> 0:02:04.320
<v Speaker 2>buy the program, which ran two separate remarks which were

0:02:04.320 --> 0:02:08.320
<v Speaker 2>made fifty minutes apart, and ran them into one, making

0:02:08.360 --> 0:02:12.799
<v Speaker 2>it appear that he said, and I'm paraphrasing, let's all

0:02:12.800 --> 0:02:14.680
<v Speaker 2>march down to the Capitol and fight.

0:02:15.160 --> 0:02:17.400
<v Speaker 1>And what they missed in that edit was something that

0:02:17.440 --> 0:02:19.880
<v Speaker 1>Trump said in the middle of the speech, which was

0:02:20.120 --> 0:02:23.240
<v Speaker 1>urging the crowd to be patriotic and to be peaceful.

0:02:23.919 --> 0:02:25.880
<v Speaker 1>Here's what the BBC aired.

0:02:26.440 --> 0:02:30.160
<v Speaker 3>We're going to walk down to the capital and I'll

0:02:30.160 --> 0:02:34.440
<v Speaker 3>be there with you, and we fight. We fight like hell,

0:02:34.760 --> 0:02:36.880
<v Speaker 3>and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going

0:02:36.960 --> 0:02:38.079
<v Speaker 3>to have a country anymore.

0:02:39.440 --> 0:02:42.679
<v Speaker 1>Here's what Trump actually said. This is from the raw

0:02:42.720 --> 0:02:46.160
<v Speaker 1>footage you'll hear there's a slight digital glitch, but we

0:02:46.280 --> 0:02:49.560
<v Speaker 1>haven't edited this at all. It's the full speech as

0:02:49.760 --> 0:02:52.000
<v Speaker 1>ed on American TV live that day.

0:02:52.960 --> 0:02:55.560
<v Speaker 3>And after this, we're going to walk down and I'll

0:02:55.600 --> 0:03:00.200
<v Speaker 3>be there with you. We're going to walk down. We're

0:03:00.200 --> 0:03:03.280
<v Speaker 3>going to walk down anyone you want. But I think

0:03:03.360 --> 0:03:06.280
<v Speaker 3>right here, we're going to walk down to the Capital

0:03:09.440 --> 0:03:13.600
<v Speaker 3>and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and

0:03:14.160 --> 0:03:17.440
<v Speaker 3>congressmen and women, and we're probably not going to be

0:03:17.520 --> 0:03:23.400
<v Speaker 3>cheering so much for some of them, because you'll never

0:03:23.919 --> 0:03:27.680
<v Speaker 3>take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength,

0:03:27.720 --> 0:03:28.880
<v Speaker 3>and you have to be strong.

0:03:31.480 --> 0:03:35.080
<v Speaker 4>We have come to demand that Congress do the right

0:03:35.160 --> 0:03:40.800
<v Speaker 4>thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated,

0:03:41.120 --> 0:03:42.200
<v Speaker 4>lawfully slated.

0:03:43.640 --> 0:03:46.520
<v Speaker 3>I know that everyone here will soon be marching over.

0:03:46.320 --> 0:03:51.480
<v Speaker 5>To the Capitol Building to peacefully and patriotically make your

0:03:51.600 --> 0:03:56.440
<v Speaker 5>voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong.

0:03:56.800 --> 0:04:00.040
<v Speaker 1>More than fifteen minutes later, in the original spaege T

0:04:00.240 --> 0:04:00.920
<v Speaker 1>said this.

0:04:01.240 --> 0:04:04.920
<v Speaker 3>Something's wrong here, something's really wrong can have happened, and

0:04:05.000 --> 0:04:07.320
<v Speaker 3>we fight, We fight like hell.

0:04:07.640 --> 0:04:09.680
<v Speaker 5>And if you don't fight like hell, you're.

0:04:09.560 --> 0:04:10.960
<v Speaker 4>Not going to have a country anymore.

0:04:11.760 --> 0:04:15.920
<v Speaker 5>Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors.

0:04:15.640 --> 0:04:20.040
<v Speaker 3>Have not yet begun, my fellow Americans, for our movement,

0:04:20.600 --> 0:04:24.760
<v Speaker 3>for our children, and for our beloved country. And I

0:04:24.839 --> 0:04:29.720
<v Speaker 3>say this, despite all that's happened, the best is yet

0:04:30.040 --> 0:04:30.599
<v Speaker 3>to come.

0:04:33.160 --> 0:04:36.080
<v Speaker 1>So the BBC cut out the line about brave senators

0:04:36.120 --> 0:04:39.000
<v Speaker 1>and congressmen and women. It put the line from the

0:04:39.160 --> 0:04:42.080
<v Speaker 1>very end of the speech about fighting like hell right

0:04:42.120 --> 0:04:44.359
<v Speaker 1>after the line from the beginning of the speech about

0:04:44.360 --> 0:04:47.880
<v Speaker 1>marching to the Capitol, and it also didn't include Trump's

0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:50.800
<v Speaker 1>warning to the crowd to be peaceful. James, I think

0:04:50.880 --> 0:04:52.960
<v Speaker 1>you could make a pretty good argument that many of

0:04:53.000 --> 0:04:56.680
<v Speaker 1>the people who rioted at the Capitol were Donald Trump's supporters.

0:04:57.240 --> 0:05:00.919
<v Speaker 1>They were mobilized by Donald Trump's complaint about Mike Pence

0:05:01.279 --> 0:05:05.280
<v Speaker 1>and about the election having been stolen. This feels like

0:05:05.400 --> 0:05:08.600
<v Speaker 1>the BBC has tripped itself up up in doing something

0:05:08.640 --> 0:05:11.520
<v Speaker 1>that they didn't need to do. They could have just

0:05:11.560 --> 0:05:13.239
<v Speaker 1>played the speech as.

0:05:13.040 --> 0:05:16.440
<v Speaker 2>It was that's exactly right, and the speech history shows.

0:05:16.480 --> 0:05:20.599
<v Speaker 2>The speech has been shown endlessly over the years, and

0:05:20.640 --> 0:05:24.200
<v Speaker 2>there's still a stain on the way Donald Trump conducted

0:05:24.279 --> 0:05:27.680
<v Speaker 2>himself on that day. But in a way, it's a

0:05:27.720 --> 0:05:31.159
<v Speaker 2>separate issue to what we're talking about right now, which

0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:36.200
<v Speaker 2>is that the BBC, the public broadcaster in Great Britain,

0:05:36.600 --> 0:05:41.440
<v Speaker 2>egregiously misrepresented the words of the sitting US president to

0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:45.479
<v Speaker 2>make it look like he specifically called for acts of

0:05:45.600 --> 0:05:49.960
<v Speaker 2>violence on that day, when in fact it was far

0:05:50.000 --> 0:05:51.000
<v Speaker 2>more nuanced than that.

0:05:55.279 --> 0:05:58.400
<v Speaker 1>Trump's saying he wants a billion US dollars from the BBC.

0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:01.960
<v Speaker 1>He's given them this deadline of Friday. But I wonder

0:06:02.000 --> 0:06:03.920
<v Speaker 1>if the BBC is going to do what a couple

0:06:04.000 --> 0:06:07.799
<v Speaker 1>of other media companies have done under similar threads. Paramount

0:06:07.800 --> 0:06:11.680
<v Speaker 1>Global and ABC News in the United States both paid

0:06:11.720 --> 0:06:15.880
<v Speaker 1>him around fifteen million US dollars to settle claims before

0:06:15.880 --> 0:06:19.320
<v Speaker 1>they got to court. Trump's also threatened to sue various

0:06:19.360 --> 0:06:22.640
<v Speaker 1>other media outlets, including divisions of News Corps, which we

0:06:22.760 --> 0:06:25.719
<v Speaker 1>both work for. What would you think the BBC will

0:06:25.760 --> 0:06:29.040
<v Speaker 1>do now, give him some money, hope it'll go away,

0:06:29.800 --> 0:06:33.000
<v Speaker 1>or can they not do that given they're a public broadcaster.

0:06:33.600 --> 0:06:36.719
<v Speaker 2>As it stands, they're in a hopeless bargaining position. Claire,

0:06:36.839 --> 0:06:40.719
<v Speaker 2>I mean they have admitted faults on this. There's no

0:06:40.839 --> 0:06:43.640
<v Speaker 2>black and white here. The BBC is in the wrong.

0:06:44.440 --> 0:06:49.599
<v Speaker 2>They failed to meet their own editorial benchmarks, and there's

0:06:49.640 --> 0:06:54.080
<v Speaker 2>no question they characterized Donald Trump as an agitator of

0:06:54.200 --> 0:06:57.239
<v Speaker 2>public violence. I would think it's most likely that they'll

0:06:57.279 --> 0:07:00.360
<v Speaker 2>have to, as you say, offer some kind of financial

0:07:00.400 --> 0:07:02.719
<v Speaker 2>settlement in the hope that Trump will drop the action

0:07:03.279 --> 0:07:07.000
<v Speaker 2>move on and then the BBC can regroup and move forward.

0:07:07.520 --> 0:07:08.679
<v Speaker 2>But they're in the wrong.

0:07:11.920 --> 0:07:14.280
<v Speaker 1>The editing of this speech came to the President's attention

0:07:14.480 --> 0:07:17.360
<v Speaker 1>really because of adossier published by The Telegraph in the

0:07:17.440 --> 0:07:20.440
<v Speaker 1>UK which revealed not only this editing, but also a

0:07:20.480 --> 0:07:23.480
<v Speaker 1>couple of other issues going on at the BBC. One

0:07:23.560 --> 0:07:26.040
<v Speaker 1>was what the dossier said was biased reporting of the

0:07:26.080 --> 0:07:29.600
<v Speaker 1>Israel Gaza conflict, including a documentary which turned out to

0:07:29.680 --> 0:07:33.400
<v Speaker 1>have featured, without disclosure, the son of a Hamas official,

0:07:34.040 --> 0:07:37.920
<v Speaker 1>and their coverage of trans issues. Something that wasn't included

0:07:37.960 --> 0:07:40.320
<v Speaker 1>in the dossier but has received a lot of attention

0:07:40.600 --> 0:07:44.800
<v Speaker 1>was newsreader Martine Croxel being slapped over the hand by

0:07:44.840 --> 0:07:47.960
<v Speaker 1>the BBC for the way she corrected a headline that

0:07:48.040 --> 0:07:50.400
<v Speaker 1>had been written for her by trans people.

0:07:50.880 --> 0:07:54.640
<v Speaker 6>Let's hear that of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, How's released

0:07:54.680 --> 0:07:58.200
<v Speaker 6>research which says that nearly six hundred heat related deaths

0:07:58.200 --> 0:08:01.960
<v Speaker 6>are expected in the UK. Malcolm Mystery, who was involved

0:08:01.960 --> 0:08:06.200
<v Speaker 6>in the research, says that the aged, pregnant people, women

0:08:06.760 --> 0:08:11.040
<v Speaker 6>and those with pre existing health conditions need to take precautions.

0:08:12.480 --> 0:08:15.520
<v Speaker 1>When she said the word people, Martin Croxel kind of

0:08:15.800 --> 0:08:18.320
<v Speaker 1>widened her eyes and made it clear from her facial

0:08:18.360 --> 0:08:22.280
<v Speaker 1>expression that she thought this was ridiculous. That's what she's

0:08:22.320 --> 0:08:26.240
<v Speaker 1>in trouble for. It seems ludicrous that the BBC is

0:08:26.240 --> 0:08:27.640
<v Speaker 1>in this place, doesn't it?

0:08:27.640 --> 0:08:31.000
<v Speaker 2>It does, and in a way, the Croxall matter was

0:08:31.040 --> 0:08:35.880
<v Speaker 2>symptomatic of a whole range of concerns, both within and

0:08:36.000 --> 0:08:40.160
<v Speaker 2>outside the BBC about the direction of the broadcaster. The

0:08:40.200 --> 0:08:44.280
<v Speaker 2>overarching problem really is the perception that there is institutional

0:08:44.320 --> 0:08:48.440
<v Speaker 2>bias at the BBC, and that the BBC indeed has

0:08:48.520 --> 0:08:52.200
<v Speaker 2>been captured by for one of a better word, a

0:08:52.280 --> 0:08:56.640
<v Speaker 2>number of activists who work within the BBC. The idea

0:08:56.800 --> 0:09:00.959
<v Speaker 2>that a journalist could be disciplined for using the word

0:09:01.080 --> 0:09:06.040
<v Speaker 2>women rather than pregnant people does seem utterly absurd, but

0:09:06.440 --> 0:09:09.040
<v Speaker 2>perhaps within the BBC it's not as strange as you

0:09:09.120 --> 0:09:12.760
<v Speaker 2>might think. There is also accusations, and have been for

0:09:12.760 --> 0:09:16.439
<v Speaker 2>a while, of the issue of groupthink within the BBC,

0:09:17.120 --> 0:09:20.360
<v Speaker 2>and that's to say that possibly a minority of powerful

0:09:20.360 --> 0:09:24.880
<v Speaker 2>people within that organization dictate what's acceptable and what's not.

0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:28.920
<v Speaker 2>When you think of the BBC and its obligations to

0:09:29.040 --> 0:09:33.600
<v Speaker 2>the wider British public, the idea that a few privileged

0:09:33.760 --> 0:09:38.560
<v Speaker 2>people within the organization basically can be the arbiters of

0:09:38.559 --> 0:09:41.640
<v Speaker 2>what's right and what's wrong is a pretty die situation.

0:09:43.000 --> 0:09:45.839
<v Speaker 1>That brings us to the ABC, which in twenty twenty one,

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:48.360
<v Speaker 1>on the Full Corners program aired a version of that

0:09:48.440 --> 0:09:51.679
<v Speaker 1>same speech by Donald Trump, the January sixth, twenty twenty

0:09:51.679 --> 0:09:55.640
<v Speaker 1>one speech, but they had a slightly different edit. Let's

0:09:55.760 --> 0:09:57.480
<v Speaker 1>hear what Full Corners put to air.

0:09:58.160 --> 0:10:00.800
<v Speaker 3>And after this, we're going to walk down and I'll

0:10:00.840 --> 0:10:07.120
<v Speaker 3>be there with you, because you'll never take back our

0:10:07.200 --> 0:10:10.280
<v Speaker 3>country with weakness. You have to show strength and you

0:10:10.360 --> 0:10:11.160
<v Speaker 3>have to be strong.

0:10:12.920 --> 0:10:16.320
<v Speaker 1>So what's missing there is the line about supporting brave

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:19.439
<v Speaker 1>senators and congressmen and women. This is that line from

0:10:19.520 --> 0:10:20.840
<v Speaker 1>the original speech.

0:10:21.120 --> 0:10:23.760
<v Speaker 3>And after this, we're going to walk down and I'll

0:10:23.800 --> 0:10:24.600
<v Speaker 3>be there with you.

0:10:25.160 --> 0:10:29.240
<v Speaker 4>We're going to walk down. We're going to walk down

0:10:30.000 --> 0:10:30.920
<v Speaker 4>anyone you want.

0:10:30.960 --> 0:10:33.000
<v Speaker 3>But I think right here, we're going to walk down

0:10:33.440 --> 0:10:39.920
<v Speaker 3>to the Capital and we're going to cheer on our

0:10:40.000 --> 0:10:43.319
<v Speaker 3>brave senators and congressmen and women.

0:10:44.520 --> 0:10:47.600
<v Speaker 1>What's your take on what the ABC did hear and

0:10:48.080 --> 0:10:51.040
<v Speaker 1>whether it's any different from what the BBC did.

0:10:51.480 --> 0:10:54.600
<v Speaker 2>I think for Corners has got some pretty serious questions

0:10:54.600 --> 0:10:57.800
<v Speaker 2>to answer here. In the past few days, they have

0:10:58.080 --> 0:11:02.720
<v Speaker 2>publicly stated that they defend the journalism of Sarah Ferguson,

0:11:03.080 --> 0:11:06.400
<v Speaker 2>who was the reporter who worked on that story, and

0:11:06.440 --> 0:11:10.320
<v Speaker 2>they have argued that they have reviewed the program. It's

0:11:10.360 --> 0:11:14.520
<v Speaker 2>fine as it stands. However, what they did is not

0:11:14.640 --> 0:11:18.880
<v Speaker 2>terribly different to what the BBC did. Basically, the ABC

0:11:19.240 --> 0:11:25.240
<v Speaker 2>doctored footage to misrepresent what Trump was saying on that day.

0:11:25.559 --> 0:11:28.240
<v Speaker 2>Now you can get into the semantics of whether or

0:11:28.280 --> 0:11:31.280
<v Speaker 2>not the clip they used was not as bad as

0:11:31.320 --> 0:11:34.320
<v Speaker 2>what the BBC put to air, but it's the same problem.

0:11:34.840 --> 0:11:38.559
<v Speaker 2>Someone within the ABC decided to clip up a speech

0:11:39.080 --> 0:11:42.520
<v Speaker 2>to fit a particular narrative, a narrative that was damaging

0:11:42.679 --> 0:11:45.480
<v Speaker 2>or more damaging to Trump. And if we're in the

0:11:45.520 --> 0:11:48.880
<v Speaker 2>business of truth and the media is then what the

0:11:48.920 --> 0:11:51.319
<v Speaker 2>ABC put to air wasn't the truth.

0:11:55.360 --> 0:11:58.960
<v Speaker 1>Coming up the new defamation landscape Donald Trump has created

0:11:58.960 --> 0:12:15.520
<v Speaker 1>for the ABC and all media. There was another instance

0:12:15.520 --> 0:12:18.800
<v Speaker 1>where the ABC was accused of selectively editing footage, and

0:12:18.840 --> 0:12:22.120
<v Speaker 1>that's in relation to Australian troops in Afghanistan. This is

0:12:22.160 --> 0:12:25.560
<v Speaker 1>a promo for a report about allegations of war crimes.

0:12:25.720 --> 0:12:30.000
<v Speaker 1>The ABC's admitted included the insertion of gunshot sounds that

0:12:30.040 --> 0:12:33.959
<v Speaker 1>were not present in the original recording. One of the

0:12:33.960 --> 0:12:36.840
<v Speaker 1>people concerned in that matter was Heston Russell, a former

0:12:36.880 --> 0:12:41.560
<v Speaker 1>commando who sued the ABC for defamation successfully. He's very

0:12:41.600 --> 0:12:45.360
<v Speaker 1>agitated about it. But the ABC, despite having admitted that

0:12:45.440 --> 0:12:49.760
<v Speaker 1>this happened, really hasn't faced any consequences, have they not?

0:12:49.840 --> 0:12:53.599
<v Speaker 2>Really? They apologized over the Heston Russell matter. The apology

0:12:53.720 --> 0:12:58.360
<v Speaker 2>and their claim that the inserted gunshots was inadvertent rather

0:12:58.360 --> 0:13:03.280
<v Speaker 2>than deliberate, underplays the seriousness of what they did. I mean,

0:13:03.320 --> 0:13:06.760
<v Speaker 2>this was on their flagship carent affairs program Four Corners.

0:13:08.400 --> 0:13:14.559
<v Speaker 2>Somebody had to be responsible for inserting gunshot audio. It

0:13:14.640 --> 0:13:18.880
<v Speaker 2>doesn't happen by itself or accidentally, just as the clip

0:13:18.920 --> 0:13:21.680
<v Speaker 2>up of the Trump speech doesn't happen by accident.

0:13:22.200 --> 0:13:25.360
<v Speaker 1>The implication from the ABC in the Heston Russell gunshot

0:13:25.480 --> 0:13:27.960
<v Speaker 1>matter was that somebody junior had done this sort of

0:13:27.960 --> 0:13:31.920
<v Speaker 1>a well meaning editor, you presume making a promo has

0:13:31.960 --> 0:13:35.360
<v Speaker 1>thought that this would sound better with a few more

0:13:35.400 --> 0:13:38.360
<v Speaker 1>gunshots in it. And it seems that they've got themselves

0:13:38.400 --> 0:13:41.400
<v Speaker 1>into a similar kind of pickle with a doctored image

0:13:41.440 --> 0:13:45.120
<v Speaker 1>of the front page of the Australian. Now what's that about.

0:13:45.360 --> 0:13:49.120
<v Speaker 2>Well, on the Insiders program on Sunday, Claire, they docted

0:13:49.200 --> 0:13:52.480
<v Speaker 2>a front page of the Australian newspaper in a bid

0:13:52.600 --> 0:13:56.680
<v Speaker 2>to I suppose poke fun at a liberal politician Jane Hume.

0:13:57.280 --> 0:13:59.880
<v Speaker 2>If you can believe this, The defense for Doctor and

0:14:00.120 --> 0:14:03.080
<v Speaker 2>The Australian to make a joke at the expense of

0:14:03.120 --> 0:14:07.360
<v Speaker 2>a conservative politician was that it was satire that only

0:14:07.400 --> 0:14:11.440
<v Speaker 2>really flies if the satire is easily detectable, which it wasn't.

0:14:12.160 --> 0:14:15.400
<v Speaker 2>And you also have to question why a serious program

0:14:15.760 --> 0:14:19.560
<v Speaker 2>like Insiders, which lets be honest, is not fronted by comedians,

0:14:20.440 --> 0:14:22.000
<v Speaker 2>is attempting satire anyway.

0:14:25.080 --> 0:14:27.400
<v Speaker 1>I can't recall the President of the United States, who's

0:14:27.480 --> 0:14:31.520
<v Speaker 1>quite as lawsuit happy as Donald Trump. Is this, James,

0:14:31.520 --> 0:14:34.080
<v Speaker 1>a new reality that we need to get used to

0:14:34.320 --> 0:14:36.760
<v Speaker 1>here where I think once we might have thought in

0:14:36.760 --> 0:14:40.160
<v Speaker 1>Australia that we're so far away from international affairs that

0:14:40.640 --> 0:14:43.760
<v Speaker 1>the likelihood of getting sued by a foreign politician was

0:14:44.240 --> 0:14:44.760
<v Speaker 1>very low.

0:14:45.480 --> 0:14:48.240
<v Speaker 2>Well, possibly that might have been previously been the case,

0:14:48.280 --> 0:14:51.440
<v Speaker 2>but in this brave new digital world, in a sense,

0:14:51.480 --> 0:14:54.360
<v Speaker 2>all bets are off. I mean, with the BBC example,

0:14:54.440 --> 0:14:57.480
<v Speaker 2>Donald Trump was apparently unaware of this, still was brought

0:14:57.480 --> 0:15:02.080
<v Speaker 2>to his attention recently, but that particular Panorama program virtually

0:15:02.120 --> 0:15:04.720
<v Speaker 2>got no play in the US, and it was only

0:15:05.000 --> 0:15:07.920
<v Speaker 2>until the recent leak to the Telegraph newspaper about the

0:15:07.960 --> 0:15:12.040
<v Speaker 2>memo that the issue surfaced. So you know, it may

0:15:12.080 --> 0:15:16.400
<v Speaker 2>well have stayed hidden forevermore. But it's also an indication

0:15:16.480 --> 0:15:21.120
<v Speaker 2>that it doesn't take much for a damaging, potentially defamatory

0:15:21.760 --> 0:15:25.360
<v Speaker 2>piece of journalism to be uncovered and for it to

0:15:25.400 --> 0:15:27.360
<v Speaker 2>be seized upon by him. Ever.

0:15:37.640 --> 0:15:40.760
<v Speaker 1>James Madden is Media editor of The Australian. You can

0:15:40.840 --> 0:15:43.680
<v Speaker 1>check out James's reporting and all the nation's best news

0:15:43.800 --> 0:15:46.400
<v Speaker 1>right now at the Australian dot com, dot au