Some great stuff in this week’s Media Bytes.
Including a tribute to Olivia on Today from Rick James who died in 2004.
But if you watch the report it says “This one from Rick James. He says” - no mention of his estate.
2 Likes
She was just looking at the next name on the list and reading the screen - she wouldn’t have known in that split second that what she was saying was wrong.
1 Like
The interns quickly going through verified accounts posting tributes wouldn’t have known who he was probably. It’s not that big of a deal.
1 Like
@anthony78977 getting a mention on Media Bites.
3 Likes
Art imitates life imitates art
Well this is definitely a surprise, and an even bigger surprise that the Today Show left my watermark in! Thanks for noticing this @sammy123 !
4 Likes
2 Likes
If the intern doesn’t know who he is, and don’t read “estate”, and can’t communicate that to the host effectively… don’t put it to air. Broadcasting misinformation is a big deal.
1 Like
It’s secure/private email - important for retaining privacy of sources who might leak to the show.
10 Likes
I’ve noticed a number of the news department emails are “proton mail” addresses - I believe it might be in response to the previous raids on ABC to uncover leaked sources.
2 Likes
Oh, so they were concerned about people leaking emails to webites.
1 Like
No, if you are a whistleblower or trying to remain secret you probably won’t message x@abc.net.au.
5 Likes
I’d say there are also advantages to having the information stored on servers that are end-to-end encrypted and located in another country. Government agencies and legal processes would have a much harder time getting access to information contained in the emails.
It’s basically in response to the 2019 police raid on the ABC.
I do love the “f**k you” message it sends.
ABC statement to Media Watch
The ABC participates in the Australian Workplace Equality Index (AWEI) which forms part of the ACON Health Limited (ACON) – Pride Inclusion Program. The AWEI is a national employee benchmarking index; 186 employers across all sectors participated in the index in 2021. It measures the impact of inclusion initiatives in organisations and is used by the ABC to monitor progress and help improve workplace practices.
The ABC also participates in other benchmarking indexes to monitor its progress and improve workplace practices, such as those run by the Diversity Council of Australia, Reconciliation Australia and the Australian Network on Disability.
Participation in benchmarking indexes has no bearing on content commissioning processes and no influence on editorial content.
ABC Editorial Policies require all journalists and content makers to:
- Maintain the independence and integrity of the ABC;
- Exercise ABC editorial control over the content the ABC broadcasts or publishes;
- Ensure that editorial decisions are not improperly influenced by political, sectional, commercial or personal interests.
The ABC has rigorous and independent pre- and post-publication processes to reinforce these standards.
Transgender and gender identity issues are complex and require careful editorial judgement to ensure informed reporting without causing offence or undue distress and harm to vulnerable individuals and communities.
Like other responsible media, the ABC endeavours to ensure its reporting is based on credible research, talking to people with lived experience, peak bodies and qualified experts and taking an evidence-based approach.
ABC journalists and content teams will continue to report on these matters from all relevant perspectives and the AWEI index will have no bearing on their editorial decision making.
In response to story last night
Last nights episode wasn’t far off being a slightly better-researched story than what you’d see on Sky After Dark.
1 Like
I don’t think that’s a fair assessment.
The language media watch use and the clear distinction they drive between facts, their interpretation and Paul’s opinion, put them far ahead of anything on Sky After Dark. MW observe events that have happened, build a case with the evidence at hand, and draw a conclusion based on what the case tells them.
Sky After Dark make conclusions based on opinions and find whatever they can use to back up those claims, regardless of credibility.
I think they raised some very valid concerns over impartiality. Regardless of the ACON and their cause being one close to my heart and the fact I think LGBTQIA+ progressive thinking is good, the notion that the ABC can be accused of having their editorial conduct swayed by that link isn’t helpful.
Especially when opposition to the ABC, like the voices on Sky After Dark, can use that as evidence to support their view of a bias.
The ABC needs to be above reproach.
3 Likes
I find this statement very concerning, how can this be at all acceptable?