In a significant development, senior officials from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) are anticipated to testify before the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion. This inquiry will scrutinize allegations regarding the broadcasters’ reporting on Israel and the Middle East, particularly claiming inaccuracies and bias.
Richard Lancaster SC, counsel assisting the commission, confirmed the upcoming testimonies during the inquiry’s third block of public hearings, which resumed today in Sydney. These hearings, set to continue until July 10, aim to address antisemitism, focusing on its manifestations in social media and journalism.
Lancaster highlighted that many submissions received by the commission were “highly critical” of the ABC and SBS. He emphasized the crucial role that these taxpayer-funded outlets play in the media landscape, stating, “Their statutes, charters, and policies commit them to high standards of accuracy, impartiality and balance.” Such standards, Lancaster noted, bind these organizations to reflect and foster journalistic integrity.
Witnesses will include representatives from ABC and SBS, who are expected to clarify the approach each broadcaster takes in reporting on the ongoing Middle East conflict. Distinguished figures such as ABC managing director Hugh Marks, along with SBS managing director Jane Palfreyman, are anticipated to provide evidence. Senior editorial executives and staff involved in handling complaints may also be called to the stand.
Critical scrutiny is likely to extend to various aspects of broadcasting, including story selection, language use, source credibility, headlines, correction processes, and the portrayal of Israeli and Jewish perspectives. Furthermore, the commission may probe whether staff are adequately trained to differentiate between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitism.
The inquiry follows heightened criticism targeting public broadcasters after the Hamas-led attacks in Israel on October 7, 2023, leading to an escalation of conflict in Gaza. The commission has received over 20,000 submissions, although it has not disclosed how many pertain to either the ABC or SBS. Notable testimonies have already indicated that certain media outlets, including ABC, may have underestimated the gravity of antisemitism post-October 7. Former Age editor-in-chief Michael Gawenda remarked on the media’s shortcomings, while witness Léa Levy accused ABC’s television of offering insufficient recognition to the suffering in Israel.
Despite the criticism, both broadcasters have defended their reporting. An ABC spokesperson affirmed that the organization submitted a written statement and continues to engage constructively with the inquiry. Marks dismissed some criticisms as “unfounded,” while chair Kim Williams reiterated the broadcaster’s commitment to the integrity of its coverage. Similarly, SBS asserted that its journalism adheres to its charter and code of practice, underscoring its responsibility to deliver accurate and balanced coverage.
The statutory obligations of both broadcasters will likely be central to the inquiry’s proceedings. The ABC Act mandates that news and information provided by the corporation must be accurate and impartial, resonating with recognised standards in objective journalism. On the other hand, SBS operates under a separate legislative framework, which includes a distinct code governing issues of accuracy and balance.
Another pivotal point may be the broadcasters’ decision against formally adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. The commission employs this definition, with Commissioner Virginia Bell stating it should be applied contextually, clarifying that not all criticism of Israel qualifies as antisemitic. The ABC has articulated that while it does not see the IHRA definition as inconsistent with its understanding of antisemitism, it raises concerns regarding specific examples. SBS similarly relies on its established charter and guidelines.
Critics argue that general rules on racism and hate speech fall short when attempting to identify antisemitism manifested through critiques of Israel, Zionism, or Jewish institutions. Under the Royal Commissions Act 1902, the inquiry has the authority to summon witnesses, gather evidence under oath, and demand document production. Neglecting a valid summons could incur criminal penalties.
Currently, there is no indication that either broadcaster is refusing to cooperate with the inquiry. Upcoming hearings will also investigate social media platforms and the propagation of antisemitic content online. Lancaster noted that major companies like Meta, Google, LinkedIn, and TikTok have engaged meaningfully with the commission, whereas others like X and Telegram have not provided adequate responses.
For ongoing updates and more details, readers can refer to J-Wire’s report on the developments concerning the ABC and SBS before the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion.
