Speaker 1: This is the Media Show, with Jack outing Hello and
Speaker 1: welcome to the Media Show. Tonight we'll take a look
Speaker 1: at Elon Musk's war with advertisers, labour spreading, cost of living,
Speaker 1: fake news, and a look at the ABC's investigation into
Speaker 1: Network seven. But first, now to the chaos in the UK,
Speaker 1: with riots spilling into the streets after three young girls
Speaker 1: were brutally murdered by a seventeen year old who can
Speaker 1: only be described as pure evil. He was also charged
Speaker 1: with ten counts of attempted murder, with other victims hospitalized
Speaker 1: with their injuries.
Speaker 2: The country is bracing itself for more scenes like this.
Speaker 2: Police are aware of thirty gatherings and are preparing for
Speaker 2: a day of disorder. An extra two two hundred riot
Speaker 2: trained officers are being deployed to confront whatever comes next.
Speaker 1: And the media was quick to blame misinformation for the
Speaker 1: riots because in the lead up to the rights false
Speaker 1: information spread that the evil murderer we mentioned as an
Speaker 1: immigrant and a Muslim. Turns out he was actually born
Speaker 1: in the UK to Rewandan parents and his family was Christian.
Speaker 3: Violin anty immigration riots continue in the UK. The protests
Speaker 3: first broke seven days ago after anti immigration misinformation campaign
Speaker 3: stoked outrage over a stabbing attack that left three children
Speaker 3: dead in northern England.
Speaker 1: But there have also been horrific moments captured by the
Speaker 1: so called progressive counter protesters. Now this includes Labor councilor
Speaker 1: Ricky Jones, who's actually been arrested for encouraging the murder
Speaker 1: of protesters.
Speaker 4: Children, women, using no friends artist in a smartic, they
Speaker 4: are disgusting?
Speaker 5: Do we need to.
Speaker 1: Cold up and get it alone? Well? Joining me on
Speaker 1: the show this week is skyn New's host Caleb Bond
Speaker 1: and skyn New's contributor Louise Roberts. Caleb, let's STARp with you.
Speaker 1: What is going on in the UK and what do
Speaker 1: you make of this conflict I think between the media,
Speaker 1: the protesters, the social media's role in the early reports
Speaker 1: which turned out to be erroneous. What's going on?
Speaker 4: Well? May I first point out the muted clapping behind
Speaker 4: that Labor councilor there when he called for throats to
Speaker 4: be cut.
Speaker 1: There were some cheers.
Speaker 4: Of I know they didn't quite know what it just happened.
Speaker 1: But they're like, it's just grinning. What has happened in
Speaker 1: the UK?
Speaker 4: As Nigel Farage pointed out during the week is that
Speaker 4: you have had years and years and years of people
Speaker 4: trying to have an open and sensible discussion about mass migration,
Speaker 4: and every time they've tried to have that discussion, they
Speaker 4: have been accused of being racist and bigoted, etc. And
Speaker 4: a pressure point has been reached on the back of
Speaker 4: misinformation that is alleged to have been spread by other
Speaker 4: foreign powers. And how smart foreign powers to realize the
Speaker 4: disunity that exists within Western nations to be able to
Speaker 4: jump on that and just further that disunity in an
Speaker 4: event like this. But the point you have reached is
Speaker 4: that when you tell people that they are animals or
Speaker 4: they are like animals, they will eventually act like animals.
Speaker 4: And that's what they've done because they've gone heck and
Speaker 4: not that we can done violence at all, but what
Speaker 4: they've looked at it and said, well, if I can't
Speaker 4: have the genuine discussion about what's happened to my country,
Speaker 4: I've got to find a way to make my voice heard.
Speaker 4: And that, unfortunately, is what has happened. And the fact
Speaker 4: that the media and particularly the new prime ministers the
Speaker 4: Kistama in the UK, keeps carying on about the far
Speaker 4: right only further stokes this division and the protests that
Speaker 4: we've seen throughout the week, because a lot of these people,
Speaker 4: although they act like thugs, wouldn't see themselves as far right.
Speaker 4: They would see themselves as good British people who don't
Speaker 4: like what's happened to their country, and they're out there
Speaker 4: in their mind trying to fight for their country and
Speaker 4: stand up for what they think is right. And so
Speaker 4: when you describe them as far right, it just makes
Speaker 4: them angrier and they go on to protest more. So
Speaker 4: you set it up as the far right and then
Speaker 4: the anti racists, and you put those two together. Of course,
Speaker 4: anti racist implies that they're the good people, and far
Speaker 4: right implies that they're the bad people. It does nothing
Speaker 4: to quill the division.
Speaker 1: It's a lazy fjorative because they're also labeling every center
Speaker 1: right political group nowadays, it seems to get the far
Speaker 1: right label. And then what are we then conflating them
Speaker 1: with somebody that is doing criminal rioting. I don't think
Speaker 1: that's I actually think it's quite a lazy label. I
Speaker 1: think just say this person is protesting because of this,
Speaker 1: and reporting where you possibly can. Obviously people quote, but
Speaker 1: the least, let's bring you in. What do you make
Speaker 1: of this whole situation, Well, haven't.
Speaker 6: Lived in the UK for seventeen years. I think the
Speaker 6: main issue is not the migration, it's how they focus
Speaker 6: on the assimilation. As you say, Caleb, any discussion about
Speaker 6: making a unified Britain great Britain, which is as a
Speaker 6: country is shouted down. As you know, you've got both
Speaker 6: sides saying don't destroy my country and the other side saying, well,
Speaker 6: you're being racist because you're daring to raise it. It's
Speaker 6: an idiotic situation really, And also I would say that
Speaker 6: Kirs Darma clearly has not got his own house in order. Okay,
Speaker 6: he's only a month in as the new PM, but
Speaker 6: the fact that a labor counselor is saying what he's
Speaker 6: saying quite happily on camera, knowing he's got a microphone
Speaker 6: shoved in his face and there's people around him, is
Speaker 6: just it just shows that the message about we will
Speaker 6: go after these people it has not gone down to
Speaker 6: the rank and file counselors.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think you can be emboldened by if the
Speaker 1: media is clearly taking one side in this, and in
Speaker 1: my opinion they are and every single story is of
Speaker 1: these evil protesters here on the far right, when there's
Speaker 1: probably a divergence of political views that have led to
Speaker 1: them coming out there. Then you get people on the
Speaker 1: left that are so embolden that they're talking about cutting
Speaker 1: people's throats. I think that's a problem. But look, staying
Speaker 1: on this story, there were also some hairy moments of
Speaker 1: the report orders on the ground. In one clip that's
Speaker 1: gone viral, the network cuts away from the reporter as
Speaker 1: Islami game shouting Palestine surround the woman.
Speaker 2: Community leaders have been speaking to the police as well, because.
Speaker 6: But I think apologies for the language you're hearing, but.
Speaker 5: I think you can yeah, I think Becky apologize.
Speaker 1: We need to leave you there, Louise. A lot of
Speaker 1: criticism actually the network for cutting away rather than staying
Speaker 1: on it. I'm in two minds. I think there's definitely
Speaker 1: a safety issue, and the news desk was saying, we've
Speaker 1: definitely got security there, But I mean, you've kind of
Speaker 1: got this opportunity to keep the cameras rolling or what
Speaker 1: do you think.
Speaker 6: It's the same with any sort of protest or war situation.
Speaker 6: Do you keep shooting in filming or do you run
Speaker 6: to safety as well. And I think that reporter in
Speaker 6: particular was very brave the fact she still kept broadcasting
Speaker 6: and trying to illustrate what was going on.
Speaker 1: She's very calm, was very calm, yes.
Speaker 6: Having been in a few precarious protest situations myself. The
Speaker 6: adrenaline is surging and you're thinking, I want to get
Speaker 6: the news down the line to the camera to my
Speaker 6: news editor. But at the same time, when do you
Speaker 6: pull the pin and actually prioritize your own safety. So
Speaker 6: it's very you have to judge it on the situation
Speaker 6: at hand.
Speaker 1: I think definitely, And Caleb, another reason why this clip's
Speaker 1: so interesting to me is because it has triggered off
Speaker 1: the conversations about the two tiered policing system, the two
Speaker 1: tiered media coverage in many ways. And yes, there are
Speaker 1: obviously these awful people on this particular right political side
Speaker 1: of politics that are burning things down, bashing people, doing
Speaker 1: horrific criminal things, But you've also got people on the
Speaker 1: other side of the political spectrum who were doing just
Speaker 1: as egregious things surrounding a female reporter in a very
Speaker 1: threatening manner, and it doesn't seem to get the backlash.
Speaker 1: The journalists on the news desk. He wasn't scathing of it.
Speaker 4: What do you make problem with characterizing at all is
Speaker 4: the far right, because it hasn't all been the far
Speaker 4: ll complicated correct And as we saw there, and there's
Speaker 4: there's plenty more footage of it that we've been showing
Speaker 4: on the late Debate throughout the week, there have been
Speaker 4: plenty of Islamic protests as well that have been just
Speaker 4: as violent, just as much violence perpetrated upon the other
Speaker 4: side by Muslim protesters throughout the week, but the media
Speaker 4: doesn't touch that because it comes with the added complication
Speaker 4: of potential Islamophobia and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 4: In terms of that footage there, and by the way,
Speaker 4: that crew was then followed by those men and they
Speaker 4: had the tires of their van stabbed and let down,
Speaker 4: so they weren't going to let up. In situations like that,
Speaker 4: it is important for that footage to go to wear.
Speaker 4: And I think we got the gist of what was
Speaker 4: going on from the little bit that we saw there.
Speaker 4: I mean, you know, bloke goes up to the camera
Speaker 4: and he's basically making a gun sights at it. I
Speaker 4: would continue taking the footage. I just wouldn't put it
Speaker 4: to air live because that's a really bigin point, because
Speaker 4: what they want is the attention if.
Speaker 1: There was some violent act I mean, Luis, if there
Speaker 1: was something horrible that happened. They do have all these regulations.
Speaker 1: They probably would get in a lot of trouble that
Speaker 1: would do. So it's all very well for me to
Speaker 1: say they should have kept on filming. I would like
Speaker 1: to see them release more footage now that we know
Speaker 1: it didn't get to that threshold.
Speaker 6: I agree, maybe have the reporter in the studio being
Speaker 6: interviewed by the host and saying what it was like
Speaker 6: to actually be on the scene. I think there's always
Speaker 6: an appetite for from viewers to actually see how hard
Speaker 6: journalists work and actually see the calamity that they have
Speaker 6: to deal with, actually just reporting the news itself and
Speaker 6: in a way that doesn't condone or celebrate what these
Speaker 6: thugs are doing. And clearly that's why they're going after
Speaker 6: a light broadcast. I thinking, fantastic, you can't stop me.
Speaker 6: I can say what I want, but if it's if
Speaker 6: it's recorded and then edited later, that doesn't happen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well said, well, now, let's move on to chaotic
Speaker 1: scenes at the Olympics where the International Boxing Association declared
Speaker 1: war on the IOC.
Speaker 5: We have forgotten that the Olympic Committee additional committee is
Speaker 5: not a political body. It's not a political organization, is
Speaker 5: a public organization. There so the general public and the
Speaker 5: countries have to take the whole decision, and today, unfortunately,
Speaker 5: we are witnessing the failure the death of women female boxing.
Speaker 1: The media reporting, for the most part, appears to side
Speaker 1: with the IOC, with publications such as the Sydney Morning
Speaker 1: Herald labeling the press conference fascicle. Now let's bring the
Speaker 1: panel back into discuss Caleb. There's a few This is
Speaker 1: a really complicated story, but there's a few points that
Speaker 1: I make. The IOC appears to be relying on evidence
Speaker 1: that these athletes are female, based on documents such as
Speaker 1: the passport, whereas on the other hand, the Boxing Association,
Speaker 1: whether or not there is corruption issues or governance issues,
Speaker 1: they have released times when tests were taken. They've said
Speaker 1: that it came from these water facilities, these places that
Speaker 1: if you were to accept that all the tests were
Speaker 1: flawed and there is no chromosomal issue, you would have
Speaker 1: to accept that there's this grand conspiracy that stretches all
Speaker 1: the way from the Boxing Association to each individual testing association,
Speaker 1: which is wider endorsed. To me, it seems less likely
Speaker 1: that that is happening, and more likely that the IOC
Speaker 1: is only relying on a document as opposed to anything
Speaker 1: that's a test.
Speaker 4: Well, well, it's the whole you know, choose between conspiracy
Speaker 4: and cockup. Ninety percent of the time, they're probably going
Speaker 4: to be the cock up, right, because to pull the
Speaker 4: conspiracy off would be a hell of a task. And
Speaker 4: what has troubled me about all of this is that,
Speaker 4: of course the IBA sees that they did the genetic
Speaker 4: testing and it came back with the x y chromosomes
Speaker 4: that would prove biological maleness about these two people who
Speaker 4: seem to be women and are competing as women. It
Speaker 4: would be so easy to fix all of this by
Speaker 4: the IOC taking the same genetic test or imposing the
Speaker 4: same genetic test and coming back with the results, and
Speaker 4: then it would be cleared up. We would all know.
Speaker 4: And by the way, both of the competitors could do that.
Speaker 1: But they have chosen well, and the Boxing Association says
Speaker 1: that they have been threatened because as privacy issues, and
Speaker 1: that's correct.
Speaker 4: Legally, there's only so much that they can release.
Speaker 1: But apparently athletes themselves have said, do not release my tests.
Speaker 4: You don't have permission, and you'd wonder why that might be.
Speaker 4: But the IOC could do its own testing and come
Speaker 4: to its own conclusions, and it has chosen not to
Speaker 4: do so. And what has troubled me about the coverage
Speaker 4: is that the media and us as journalists, are meant
Speaker 4: to question everything, even if sometimes those things we are
Speaker 4: questioning might go against our own beliefs or our own ideologies. Right,
Speaker 4: the media largely has taken aside that being we're not
Speaker 4: going to ask the question of the IOC, why haven't
Speaker 4: you done your own testing, because we've now decided that
Speaker 4: there are certain sacred cows, and one of them is
Speaker 4: that you can't question someone's gender identity. Both of these competitors,
Speaker 4: as far as we can see, have always lived their
Speaker 4: lives as women's and so we now decide, well, that's it.
Speaker 4: We can't question that.
Speaker 1: In this age, in the age of identity, in the
Speaker 1: age where you can be whatever you want, the piece
Speaker 1: of paper saying what you are is not proof. The
Speaker 1: science is the proof. Anyway, we're going to take a
Speaker 1: quick break because when we're back inside Labour's misinformation scandal,
Speaker 1: now to the Labor Party in Australia, which has been
Speaker 1: pined for spreading misinformation. And this is pretty funny to
Speaker 1: me because this is the party which wants to enforce
Speaker 1: strict misinformation laws on you, but doesn't want politicians to
Speaker 1: be held to the same standard. Sky reporter Riley Sullivan
Speaker 1: reports Anthony Albanesi ping for spreading misinformation on social media
Speaker 1: with misleading costs of living claims. While Australians are doing
Speaker 1: a tough battling inflation and insane mortgage repayments, our Prime
Speaker 1: Minister thought it was a smart idea to brag on
Speaker 1: social media about his government. He published a picture of
Speaker 1: a CD album cover sprooking his cost of living relief actions,
Speaker 1: and there was a backlash. X users fact checked the
Speaker 1: PM and found that most of the policies he claimed
Speaker 1: that were winter cost of living relief measures hadn't even
Speaker 1: started yet. Albanize continued his horror week with a tough
Speaker 1: interview from Pete Stefanovic, who pointed out on live television
Speaker 1: that homeowners would not get interest rate relief in part
Speaker 1: because labor had a spending issue.
Speaker 7: Are Australians facing higher rates for longer because of big
Speaker 7: spending federal and state budgets.
Speaker 4: Well, that's not what they've said, Peter, with respect.
Speaker 7: And well, this is the quote here from the RBA.
Speaker 7: Public demand is forecast to be stronger than previously expected
Speaker 7: reflecting recent public spending announcements by federal and state government.
Speaker 1: Are you saying they're wrong. Yeah, that's very different.
Speaker 4: That's very different from from the way that you characterized that, Peter.
Speaker 7: We've made your fiscal policy, budget policy works arm in
Speaker 7: arm with monetary Well that's not working at all because
Speaker 7: the RBA and Treasury are brawling at the moment.
Speaker 1: That's not true, Peter.
Speaker 7: Well you're saying completely different inflation.
Speaker 1: No, we're no, we're not. Louise what a brilliant but
Speaker 1: brutal interview.
Speaker 6: By Peter did very well indeed, Yet.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, cost of living is this issue
Speaker 1: which is plaguing everybody in Australia globally as well. What's
Speaker 1: the thought process behind doing up at a CD. By
Speaker 1: the way, the people who are doing this, his massive
Speaker 1: team of media minders, they're on good Wickeds. They probably
Speaker 1: don't have an issue with cost of living personally sitting
Speaker 1: from there their places in Canberra. But to do that
Speaker 1: and brag, is that an effect of media strategy?
Speaker 6: Well, I think dj Elbow is from this one totally
Speaker 6: out of control and at his own hand.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's got the headline sorted a CD.
Speaker 6: Who under thirty knows what a CD is? I would
Speaker 6: say as well, but cost living is not a joke.
Speaker 6: It is never a laughing matter.
Speaker 1: Globally.
Speaker 6: I cannot think of a world leader who would actually
Speaker 6: use this as some sort of parody or some sort
Speaker 6: of spin argument to sort of say, hey, look what
Speaker 6: the great work we're doing to help you while you're
Speaker 6: at the supermarket look at your receipt and going, oh
Speaker 6: my god, I've just spent five hundred dollars on what
Speaker 6: I can't even see that I'm going to actually cover
Speaker 6: the food for the family for the rest of the week.
Speaker 6: So it's just a complete ignorance of what the average
Speaker 6: person in Australia is dealing with.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and Caleb, I mean there's another element to this
Speaker 1: as well, this interview that Pete Stefanovic had with Alban Easy.
Speaker 1: He's pushed on this this tension point that they have
Speaker 1: with the RBA, and we know there was a tension
Speaker 1: point because the RBA said one of the factors was
Speaker 1: stronger government spending and then in the inquiry it was
Speaker 1: repeated again the guff moment, spending across multiple levels was
Speaker 1: a factor. How dare this bloke stand here and say
Speaker 1: that that is a false characterization on live television.
Speaker 4: I know, Well, it's just an out and out lie,
Speaker 4: isn't it. And the great problem that Alban Easy in
Speaker 4: the Treasure Jim Chalmers have is that Michelle Bullock, the
Speaker 4: Governor of the Reserve Bank, has turned out to be
Speaker 4: a very effective communicator in terms of the media war
Speaker 4: in trying to win the hearts and minds of people
Speaker 4: in terms of where cost of living is going and
Speaker 4: where their interest rates are going, and where inflation is going.
Speaker 4: Michelle Bullock has been able to communicate the RBA's view
Speaker 4: so succinctly and in such a straightforward way that Philip
Speaker 4: Low never could that. I think most people can look
Speaker 4: at it and see that the Prime Minister is making
Speaker 4: things up and to them.
Speaker 1: As tough as she's not scared by the fact that
Speaker 1: they are.
Speaker 4: Pushing back, and I was skeptical about her to begin with,
Speaker 4: because I thought we'd be better off with an RBA
Speaker 4: governor who hadn't spent most of their work career inside
Speaker 4: of the RBA, because I think that was the problem
Speaker 4: with Philip Low. But she's actually shown herself to be
Speaker 4: a very shrewd operator and a great communicator, which is
Speaker 4: what we needed at this particular point in time. But
Speaker 4: for the Prime Minister to think brag about measures that
Speaker 4: haven't even come into place yet and lie to Pete
Speaker 4: steffin Avick, I mean a fact check a CD is
Speaker 4: about as useful as the measures that he's touting on
Speaker 4: that cover there, because who's got a CD player anymore?
Speaker 4: Like then, the symbolism of that alone was like, what
Speaker 4: are you paying these people for?
Speaker 1: Bunch of bunch of boomer media advisors that reminiscing really
Speaker 1: bad stuff. Look, let's move on. Because Elon Musk has
Speaker 1: declared war on activist advertisers who pulled money away from
Speaker 1: conservative platforms on news sites. The New York Post reports
Speaker 1: the left leaning advertising cabal, accused of conspiring to suppress
Speaker 1: conservative outlets, was reportably disbanded on Thursday, just days after
Speaker 1: Elon Musk's ex slapped the group with a federal anti
Speaker 1: trust lawsuit, let's bring the panel back in now, Luise
Speaker 1: to have this massive body which is responsible for directing
Speaker 1: advertising funds for them to be accused of anti trust
Speaker 1: violations and then to just delete it. That's not a
Speaker 1: great look, Well it's not.
Speaker 6: But also the irony of someone like Elon Musk and
Speaker 6: the platform he runs and what he allows to be
Speaker 6: distributed on that platform, it beggars belief that he would
Speaker 6: go after a standard's authority given what standards he applies
Speaker 6: to his own own commercial network in a way. So
Speaker 6: I just think is typical sort of megalomaniac billionaire owner
Speaker 6: over a platform like that who doesn't like what he hears,
Speaker 6: so he launches legal action and to what end.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he definitely does not like being criticized. I'm definitely
Speaker 1: a little bit more sympathetic with him because we do
Speaker 1: get targeted by some of these groups, and look, sometimes
Speaker 1: we do make mistakes, and sometimes the criticism against us
Speaker 1: is fair, but sometimes times there are people that have
Speaker 1: very nefarious genders that group together and that was the
Speaker 1: problem with GM and now there is an attempt for
Speaker 1: them to escape accountability for these perceived violations of antitrust.
Speaker 1: Whether or not they did, we won't really know because
Speaker 1: they've broken up the organization.
Speaker 4: Yeah, And I think that's probably the best case scenario
Speaker 4: out of this, is that even if the case eventually
Speaker 4: comes to nought, it's resulted in the breaking up of
Speaker 4: the organization. Because look, I don't have a particular problem
Speaker 4: with commercial operators banding together to spend their advertising money
Speaker 4: with one mob or another, because that's just the free market, right.
Speaker 4: And if someone decides that their company's values don't aly
Speaker 4: with aligned, sorry with a media outlets values or a
Speaker 4: social media company's values, and they shouldn't be forced to
Speaker 4: advertise with them. What needs to happen on the other side,
Speaker 4: And have often said this about the right, and it's
Speaker 4: often the right that gets targeted by the left in
Speaker 4: terms of these boycotts, is the right has to do
Speaker 4: the same back to the boycotts, because the lift is
Speaker 4: very good at boycotting. It's been a tactic they've used
Speaker 4: for a long time. But the right doesn't tend to
Speaker 4: do it back. And so I would say to viewers
Speaker 4: of this network or users of X or whatever, if
Speaker 4: an advertiser decides to boycott a network or a media
Speaker 4: outlet or a social media platform that you like to use,
Speaker 4: boycott the advertiser back because they can spend their money
Speaker 4: where they want, but you can also spend your.
Speaker 1: Money bud your bud light found that exactly hard well.
Speaker 4: As consumers, I think have to use a bit more
Speaker 4: of our own power to fight back against this stuff.
Speaker 1: Well said. We'll see how that plays out, but moving
Speaker 1: on now. Four Corners Louise Milligan has a site set
Speaker 1: on Network seven and the investigation promises to be must
Speaker 1: watch TV if this promo was anything to go by.
Speaker 6: Is one of the most soul crushing places you can
Speaker 6: work in Smoke and Mirrors.
Speaker 4: Channel seven likes to portray itself as a family.
Speaker 6: I think it's a very dysfunctional family.
Speaker 1: In Silence for Life Breaking seven Silence, the fear is
Speaker 1: visceral and I haven't seen anything like it.
Speaker 4: I wouldn't just call it the second Charts Club.
Speaker 1: I'd call it the third, fourth, and fifth Charts Club.
Speaker 2: They shouldn't be in business if that's what they're doing
Speaker 2: to young women. How do they sleep at night?
Speaker 6: Four Corners Monday.
Speaker 1: ABC, Louise the Music it hasn't me a bit scared.
Speaker 1: What do you think?
Speaker 6: Well, this has been a story about misbehavior and media organizations,
Speaker 6: has just dominated the headlines the last six months, hasn't it.
Speaker 1: But I will watch it.
Speaker 6: But I do feel a bit nervous when a publicly
Speaker 6: funded broadcaster is going after commercial network and investigating them,
Speaker 6: because there's most certainly a few skeletons in the ABC closet.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'd argue that's a very good point, Caleb, your thoughts.
Speaker 4: Look, you could probably do this story about almost any
Speaker 4: broadcast or any media organization, any company.
Speaker 1: In any bank exactly for that matter.
Speaker 4: All I will say though, is that so there may
Speaker 4: be a reason miss Milligan goes after see as an
Speaker 4: aggrieved former staff member of Channel seven herself.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a good point. Well, Caleb Luise, thank you
Speaker 1: so much. That's all the time we have for tonight.
Speaker 1: Thank you for joining us. Up Next is Lefties Losing It.