ABC chair Kim Williams has attracted considerable attention with his criticism of the broadcaster’s online news choices. Williams has taken issue with what he sees as the ABC prioritising lifestyle stories over hard news.

In the process, he has raised an important issue of principle.

Is it right for the chair to insert himself into editorial decision-making, even at the level of broad direction, as here?

• READ MORE: Other public broadcasting reports

Generally speaking, the answer would be no.

To see why, it is necessary only to look back to the chaotic period in 2018 when a former chair, Justin Milne, inserted himself into editorial decision-making because of concerns that the reporting of some ABC journalists was upsetting the government and thereby imperilling the ABC’s funding.

That debacle ended with the resignation not just of Milne but of the then managing director, Michelle Guthrie, leaving a sudden vacuum of leadership and a nervous newsroom.

It is therefore risky for Williams to take a step down this path.

However, the weakness of ABC news leadership requires that something be done.

This weakness has a moral as well as a professional-practice dimension.

A risky path to follow. Video: ABC News

The moral dimension is demonstrated by the treatment of high-profile staff such as Stan Grant and Laura Tingle, and of less well-known but still valued journalists such as ABC Radio Victoria’s Nicole Chvastek, and Sydney radio’s Antoinette Lattouf. All of these journalists, in various ways, have fallen victim to the ABC’s propensity to buckle under external pressure.

The professional-practice dimension is demonstrated not just by the online performance criticised by Williams but by the prioritising of police-rounds stories over far bigger issues on the evening television bulletin, and by occasional spectacular failures such as the attempt to link the late NSW Premier Neville Wran with Sydney’s Luna Park ghost train fire.

The standing of the ABC’s best journalism — programmes such as Four Corners and Radio National’s Background Briefing — is undermined by these systemic failures.

However, indicating his preference for hard news over lifestyle stories will get Williams only so far. It lies within his power and that of the board to do what ought to have been done long ago if the ABC is serious about strengthening its news service: separate the roles of managing director and editor-in-chief.

Having them in the one person creates an inherent conflict that has nothing to do with the integrity of the individual occupying the position, but everything to do with the core responsibilities of the two jobs.

The managing director, as a board member, is responsible for the overall fortunes of the ABC. This includes its financial fortunes and its relationship with its most important stakeholder, the federal government.

An editor-in-chief’s first responsibility is not to these considerations at all, but to the public interest. That requires above all the creation of a safe space in which ABC journalists can do good journalism without looking over their shoulders to see if they are going to be the next target of an attack from a politician (Chvastek), a lobby group (Antoinette Lattouf), or News Corporation (Grant and Tingle).

The Stan Grant controversy.      Video: The Guardian

It also requires the imposition of rigorous editing processes to see that stories are properly verified, accurate and fair, regardless of the standing or wilfulness of the staff involved, and that the stories deal with issues of substance.

And in the case of Lattouf, the focus shifts to the public interest in the impact on money and morale of the prolonged legal proceedings over her sacking.

She was removed from a temporary role on ABC Sydney radio for posting on Instagram a report by Human Rights Watch, in which it was alleged that Israel was using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza.

The ABC argued unsuccessfully in the Fair Work Commission that she had not been sacked. Subsequently Lattouf made an offer to settle for $85,000 in damages and her old role back. However, the ABC has not accepted this and instead is now involved in a further legal dispute, this time in the Federal Court, over whether due process was followed in sacking her.

Fair Work Commission finds Antoinette Lattouf was sacked by ABC.  Video: ABC News

This is causing consternation in Canberra, where the Senate standing committee on environment and communications has asked the ABC how much this action is costing.

The ABC has supplied the committee with the amount but it has not been made public.

It is a textbook case of how a strong editor-in-chief who was not the managing director would act in this situation. A reporter would be assigned to find out the amount, since it is clearly a matter of public interest, and a well-connected press gallery journalist would get it without too much trouble.

ABC management would then be asked to comment, and a story containing the amount and any ABC comment would be broadcast on the ABC.

A managing director has a conflicting responsibility: to do all he or she can to protect the corporate interests of the ABC, so the amount remains secret.

Meanwhile, the ABC gives rival news organisations the chance to scoop the ABC on its own story, leaving its news service looking even weaker.

Dr Denis Muller, senior research fellow of the Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Stan Grant, a well-known Aboriginal journalist and soon-to-be former host of Q+A, has made a stand against racist abuse, saying he is “stepping away” from the media industry. Grant said he has paid a heavy price for being a journalist and has been a media target for racism.

As authors of a recent Media Diversity Australia report investigating online abuse and safety of diverse journalists, we’re not surprised.

Grant was one the few diverse journalists employed in the Australian media industry. Yet his story of relentless racial abuse is one shared by other journalists who are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, culturally and racially marginalised, LGBTQIA+ and/or living with disability.

• READ MORE: Australian writer Louisa Lim left ‘shocked and upset’ after being racially harassed in Auckland restaurant
• Stan Grant’s treatment is a failure of ABC’s leadership, mass media, and debate in this country

Grant said:

I want no part of it. I want to find a place of grace far from the stench of the media. I want to go where I am not reminded of the social media sewer.

ABC management has finally condemned the racist abuse directed at Stan Grant and apologised to him, but it has come far too late.

ABC staff have taken matters into their own hands, walking out in support of Grant.

“Leadership is coming from the bottom.”https://t.co/9hJuZc3ikT

— The Conversation (@ConversationEDU) May 22, 2023

Racism across the media
The latest round of racially motivated abuse came after Grant hosted the ABC’s coverage of the coronation of King Charles.

Grant said:

Since the King’s coronation, I have seen people in the media lie and distort my words. They have tried to depict me as hate filled. They have accused me of maligning Australia.

When Elizabeth II died, many Indigenous journalists and newsreaders were targeted for not sharing the same grief many non-Indigenous people expressed. Narelda Jacobs was one of many Aboriginal journalists who received abuse across social media and was also targeted by mainstream media.

Grant called the ABC’s lack of support an “institutional failure”, saying:

I am writing this because no-one at the ABC — whose producers invited me onto their coronation coverage as a guest — has uttered one word of public support.

In response to Grant’s column, a statement was issued from the ABC’s Director News, Justin Stevens, conceding Grant has, over many months, been subject to grotesque racist abuse, including threats to his safety.

The ABC’s Bonner Committee has recommended a full review into the ABC’s responses to racism affecting staff and how they can better support their staff.

pic.twitter.com/1nEj9ugH2B

— NITV (@NITV) May 21, 2023

What our research found
Our report, Online Safety of Diverse Journalists, commissioned by Media Diversity Australia and released this month, focused on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, culturally and racially marginalised, LGBTQIA+ and/or people living with disability.

This new research followed a 2022 Media Diversity Australia report, Who Gets to Tell Australian Stories 2.0, which detailed significant under-representation of diverse journalists in the industry, particularly Indigenous people and those from culturally and racially marginalised groups.

Our new report focused more on online safety and the high cost for diverse journalists who are often not supported or protected in the workplace. It found 85 percent of participants had experienced either personal or professional abuse online.

As one participant said:

It’s so ingrained within all parts of society, all the pillars within society, all professions, which includes the media, and I think women, particularly women of colour and from Indigenous backgrounds, they receive the most horrific and vile abuse.

The report has not yet gained interest from the Australian media other than Fourth Estate which expressed alarm at the findings.

This week an important and timely discussion of the abuse diverse journalists are experiencing for just doing their job. @BronwynCarlson @faithvalencia takes us through the latest report from @MediaDiverseAU https://t.co/uSCX8D1khO

— Fourth Estate (@fourthestateau) May 19, 2023

One of the key findings from this research was that diverse journalists often accepted that online harassment and abuse from the public was “just part of the job”. Many reported they were working in what they considered “hostile work environments”.

One participant expressed:

As soon as you say you are a journalist, the response is: you are asking for it.

It was concerning to find the normalisation of online harassment and abuse, and many diverse journalists were reluctant to report their experiences for fear of being considered a problem. Many felt if they raised the issue it would impact any chance of career progression.

A participant commented:

I am cautious revealing my struggles because I don’t want people to think I can’t handle my job.

In his recent experience, Grant said:

Aboriginal people learn to tough it out. That’s the price of survival.

Organisations have a duty of care to their employees. Online harassment and abuse of diverse journalists is a work health and safety issue and needs to be urgently treated as such.

The impact and cost to diverse journalists is high, and many make the same choice as Grant — to leave the industry to protect themselves and their health. Many spoke about how harassment and abuse was not only online; 39 percent reported the abuse moved offline.

The racist attacks on Stan Grant are sickening and sad. All of us in the media must play our part in helping quell the stench of the sewer. I am so sorry Stan. @walkleys https://t.co/TfUANxk3Ny

— Shona Martyn (@ShonaMartyn) May 19, 2023

When it comes to thinking about who gets to tell Australian stories or who gets to have a career as a journalist free of harassment and abuse, the Media Diversity Australia report evidences the hostility of the media industry for those who are not white, able bodied, and/or cis-gender and/or heterosexual.

The report also shows, as Grant points out, that online harassment and abuse actively and incessantly targets Indigenous journalists. Although many of the participants stated they were unofficially warned by their workplace to expect online violence, they said they received little support to protect and defend them from racial harassment and abuse.

I started to see exactly what I’d been warned about (…) But there was no mechanism to flag that to say that you had received a racist email to send it somewhere where that person could be put on a watch list or whatever it is, you know, where they’re going to become a serial offender.

Grant echoes the experiences of many participants when he says:

Barely a week goes by when I am not racially targeted.

The research report also reveals that workplace and online harassment in media industry involves fairly predictable culprits. As one participant highlighted, they come from a similar demographic — white men.

Grant’s resignation is a huge loss to Australian journalism. He and other diverse journalists nationally are crying out for action on the part of media bodies and organisations.

There are many other diverse journalists who have left the profession prior to Grant’s departure. One of our interviewees contacted us to say:

If a serious and well respected journalist feels the best thing to do is leave and has had no support from work — what does that mean for the rest of us?

Let’s hope the media industry is finally paying attention.

Bronwyn Carlson, professor, Indigenous Studies and director of The Centre for Global Indigenous Futures, Macquarie University; Faith Valencia-Forrester, lecturer and lawyer, Griffith University; Madi Day, lecturer, Department of Indigenous Studies, Macquarie University, and Susan Forde, director, Griffith Centre for Social and Cultural Research, Griffith University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.