Australian Press Council

Radio, Print, and Online Print and Online
306

Complainant / The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald

The Press Council considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by the publication of a cartoon in The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald on 7 January 2026 captioned “Grass roots”. The cartoon depicts a crowd of figures above a strip of grass, holding placards and calling for a Royal Commission. The figures above represent various groups including lawyers, business people, sports identities, and Labor figures, with signs reading ”Business People for RC”, “Lawyers for a Royal Com”, “Sports Greats for a RC”, “Labor Has Beens for RC” and “Dogs for a RC”. One figure has a thought bubble reading “Don’t mention the war.” In the background there is a figure carrying a megaphone agitating for a Royal Commission. In the foreground, are a number of identifiable political figures - David Littleproud, Sussan Ley, Jacinta Price, John Howard, Jillian Segal and Rupert Murdoch - who are carrying the grass above their heads as they march along. Separate from this group and to the far right, is a figure resembling the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, beating a drum accompanied by the words “Boom Boom”.

In response to complaints received, the Council asked the publications to comment on whether the material breached its Standards of Practice which requires the publications to take reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or a substantial risk to health or safety, unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest (General Principle 6). The Council noted that the complaint raised concerns that the cartoon relies on imagery and themes that closely resemble well-established antisemitic tropes, portraying Jewish figures as manipulative actors exerting hidden influence beneath a supposed “grassroots” movement. The complaint also raised concerns the cartoon diminishes the legitimate concerns expressed by those who have been directly affected by the shooting as well as those from the broader community who have called for a Royal Commission into the shooting. In relation to this, the cartoon implies that their reasoning is not predicated on their concerns with the murders, but a willingness to be manipulated by ‘Zionists,’ marching to Netanyahu’s drum.

The Council recognises that cartoons are expressions of opinion that often use exaggeration and absurdity to make a point on serious issues. For this reason, the Council has given significant latitude to cartoons when considering whether a publication has taken reasonable steps to avoid substantial offence, distress, or prejudice. However, that latitude is not unlimited, particularly where a cartoon can reinforce racial, ethnic or religious stereotypes.

The Council acknowledges the publications’ comments that the cartoon’s intention was to comment on the politicisation of the calls for a Royal Commission. The Council also acknowledges the publications’ comments that there was no intention to cause offence or prejudice. The Council notes that the intention of the cartoon or the message it is attempting to convey may be interpreted in different ways. In this context, the Council notes the depiction of political figures carrying the purported grassroots movement above their heads, while Netanyahu, who is both Jewish and the Israeli Prime Minister, stands apart, beating the drum to which the political figures march. The Council considers this imagery encodes the antisemitic trope that Jewish people secretly control or manipulate global events, governments, financial systems, or the media. The Council considers this imagery was likely to cause or contribute to substantial offence, distress and prejudice particularly to those who are Jewish.

While the Council recognises the public interest in commenting on the political motivation of some calling for the Royal Commission into the terrorist attack, the Council does not consider it was sufficient to justify the substantial offence, distress or prejudice caused or contributed to, in depicting those calling for a Royal Commission as being manipulated by the Israeli Prime Minister. Accordingly, the Council concludes that the publications failed to take reasonable steps to avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice in breach of General Principle 6.

The Council welcomes the publications’ published apologies and their stated intention to meet with Jewish community leaders.

The Council notes that, apart from finding that the publications failed to take reasonable steps to comply with its Standards of Practice, this matter underscores the importance for all publications of ensuring their editorial processes are sufficiently robust to minimise the unintended risk of causing offence, distress or prejudice. The Council also notes that, in the context of heightened community sensitivities concerning antisemitism and social cohesion, the adequacy of editorial processes should be assessed by reference to the sensitivity of the subject matter and the potential impact on affected communities.

For the full Adjudication, see: https://www.presscouncil.org.au/document/1859-complainant

307

Wilcox, who has been publicly critical of the works of fellow newspaper cartoonists in the past – particularly those penned by the Herald Sun’s Mark Knight and the late Bill Leak of The Australian – has been noticeably silent since the release of the APC’s finding, and refused to respond to questions from Diary.

Her employer, Nine Entertainment, also refused to comment on the APC ruling.

But her chief supporter, the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance, reiterated its support for Wilcox, again decrying the “vicious and specious attacks” on the cartoonist for her January illustration.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/channel-9-pushes-ahead-with-reality-tv-show-shark-despite-coogee-attack/news-story/f0f0582b6fd56acf7741407d821a8155

308

Complainant / Daily Mail Australia

The Press Council considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by an article published by Daily Mail Australia online on 31 October 2025, headed “Fiery moment Gus Lamont’s trans grandmother waves a pump-action shotgun and ERUPTS in explosive tirade at Daily Mail reporter - as police prepare to drain the dam at property where boy vanished”.

The article reported that the grandmother of missing four-year-old Gus Lamont waved a pump-action shotgun at a Daily Mail Australia reporter who attended the family’s property seeking comment about a police search. The article described the interaction between the reporter and members of the family and reported on developments in the police search for the child. The reference to the grandmother as “trans” appeared in the headline.

In response to complaints, the Council asked the publication to comment on whether the article complied with the Council’s Standards of Practice, which require publications to take reasonable steps to ensure that factual material is presented with reasonable fairness and balance (General Principle 3); and to avoid causing or contributing materially to substantial offence, distress or prejudice, or a substantial risk to health or safety, unless doing so is sufficiently in the public interest (General Principle 6). The complaints expressed concern that the reference in the headline to the grandmother’s transgender status was irrelevant to the incident described and was not justified by the public interest.

The Council acknowledges the publication’s submission that the inclusion of the word “trans” in the headline was inadvertent and notes its prompt amendment of the headline. The Council also welcomes the publication’s acknowledgement of the error and its indication that it will undertake further training regarding reporting on persons with diverse sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics. However, the Council has repeatedly stated that publications should exercise great care not to place unwarranted emphasis on characteristics of individuals such as race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, country of origin, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, illness or age.

The Council notes that the grandmother’s transgender status was not reported to be a contributing factor in the interaction involving the firearm or in the search for the missing child. In the absence of a clear link between the reported events and the woman’s transgender status, the Council considers that the prominent reference to “trans” in the headline was not relevant to the substance of the story and was unfair. Accordingly, the Council finds that the publication failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that factual material was presented with reasonable fairness and balance, in breach of General Principle 3.

The Council recognises that reporting on developments in the search for a missing child, and on an interaction involving a firearm, are matters of legitimate public interest. However, the Council considers that the prominence given to the woman’s transgender status in the headline could lead some readers to conclude that this characteristic was a contributing factor in, the disappearance of the child or the interaction with the journalist, and could contribute to substantial prejudice against transgender people. In the absence of a clear link between the woman’s transgender status and the reported events, the Council considers that the publication failed to take reasonable steps to avoid contributing materially to substantial prejudice and that there was insufficient public interest justification for including the reference. Accordingly, the Council finds a breach of General Principle 6.

For the full Adjudication, see: https://www.presscouncil.org.au/document/1856-complainant

309

Australian Press Council announces Chair transition

The Australian Press Council (APC) today announced an orderly leadership transition following Chair Dr Bronte Adams AM’s decision to step down due to increasing caring responsibilities for her mother, whose health has recently declined.

Dr Adams will remain Chair through the completion of the CEO recruitment process before handing over to Vice Chair Mohamed el Roubi as Acting Chair. Council member Kaaren Koomen AM has temporarily stepped down from Council to serve as Acting Chief Executive Officer, providing experienced organisational leadership while recruitment of a permanent CEO is finalised. Together, these arrangements will ensure a smooth transition.

Dr Adams has served as Chair since December 2025.

Dr Adams said:

"This has been a very difficult decision, and I genuinely wish circumstances were otherwise. Unfortunately, my mother’s health has declined significantly and I need to devote more of my time and attention to caring for her.

It has been a privilege to serve as Chair of the Australian Press Council. I’ve particularly valued the opportunity to work alongside Council members, the Executive and staff. Their professionalism, generosity and commitment to the public interest have made this role immensely rewarding.

While this is much earlier than I had expected or intended, I leave deeply grateful for the opportunity to have served, and I have every confidence in the future of the organisation."

Vice Chair Mohamed el Roubi thanked Dr Adams for her leadership and said he looked forward to supporting the organisation through the transition.

"I’ve greatly enjoyed working with Bronte over the past eight months and have appreciated her thoughtful, collaborative and principled approach to leadership.

During her tenure, Bronte has helped strengthen the Council’s strategic direction, governance and organisational capability, leaving the Australian Press Council well positioned for the future.

On behalf of the Council, I thank Bronte for her dedicated leadership and significant contribution, and wish her and her family all the very best.

The Council remains focused on appointing its next Chief Executive Officer and continuing its work promoting high standards of media practice, supporting freedom of expression, and providing an independent, fair and accessible complaints process for the Australian community."

Recruitment for a permanent Chair will commence shortly.

310

Australian Press Council updates Family and Domestic Violence Advisory Guideline

The Australian Press Council (APC) has formally announced its revised Family and Domestic Violence Advisory Guideline following a review and consultation process conducted earlier this year. The Council revised its Advisory Guidelines as part of its periodic review process that aims to ensure that its Guidelines and Standards remain current, relevant and reflect evolving community expectations and address community issues.

The release of the revised Guideline coincides with today’s National Roundtable on Media Reporting of Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence, convened by the Federal Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner, the NSW Women’s Safety Commissioner and Our Watch. Australian Press Council Director of Complaints Paul Nangle and Independent Journalist Member Alan Sunderland will participate in the panel discussion, Setting the standard: Towards a more responsible media approach to gender-based violence.

The Council encourages publishers, editors and journalists to familiarise themselves with the revised Guideline and apply its principles to support the responsible reporting of family and domestic violence.

The Advisory Guideline forms part of the Australian Press Council’s broader framework for promoting and maintaining high standards of journalistic practice.

The revised Family and Domestic Violence Advisory Guideline is available here.