ABC ombudsman, Fiona Cameron, has dismissed a complaint from the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age that a Media Watch segment on its China “Red Alert” series was “highly biased and failed to give a right of reply”.
Last month, the Nine-owned mastheads published a three-part series with the headline: “Australia faces the threat of war with China within three years – and we’re not ready”.
This sparked criticism from former prime minister Paul Keating, Media Watch and foreign affairs specialists, who described the series variously as “pretentious”, “hyperbolic”, “irresponsible” and implicitly racist in its depictions of China.
Keating said the series was “the most egregious and provocative news presentation of any newspaper I have witnessed in over 50 years of active public life”, and Media Watch host, Paul Barry, criticised the “comic-book sketch of jets flying out of red China to bomb Australia”, saying the series presented “no contrary view and no shading of the possibilities”.
The SMH editor, Bevan Shields, was furious and said he would demand an on-air apology for what he called Media Watch’s “hypocrisy and poor standards” because Barry didn’t give him a right of reply.
In the paper, Shields accused Media Watch of failing to adhere to the “most basic standards of journalism”.
The ombudsman said Barry did not breach editorial standards by not approaching Nine for comment because Media Watch represented the mastheads’ position and the program is opinion rather than news.
“Taking into consideration that Media Watch is a program of comment, analysis and criticism, and that the Red Alert series did prompt considerable public comment across the media landscape, the ombudsman is satisfied that the program made reasonable efforts in the circumstances to fairly convey the complainant’s strong defence of the series and its justification for covering the issue,” Cameron said in a report published on Wednesday.
“Audience members expect robust and forthright reviews from Media Watch, and that was what the program delivered on this occasion.”
Nine claimed the Media Watch report was biased, omitted that Keating had a long history of pro-China commentary and failed to mention the ABC’s own reports on this issue.
In her fourth report in the new role, Cameron found Media Watch did not breach the standard “to gather and present news and information with due impartiality”.
News sites like the @smh don't need to be quoted on @ABCmediawatch to defend their journalism. They have their own megaphone--as you can see. But we did summarise their defence and quote from the SMH editorial. Fair and reasonable IMHO. https://t.co/eRqHNX8ii8
— Paul Barry (@TheRealPBarry) March 15, 2023
Cameron said the program described Keating as a “China dove” and the audience was provided with “appropriate context” to interpret his views.
The two media organisations have been taking potshots at each other online. The Nine gossip column CBD reported that the ABC had cleared Media Watch on Wednesday, but made a mistake in attributing a 2015 comment about Media Watch to the current ABC managing director, David Anderson.
Media Watch “fact-checked” the Herald – Mark Scott was ABC MD from 2006 to 2016 (the online story was later corrected).
🚨FACT CHECK🚨
— Media Watch (@ABCmediawatch) April 18, 2023
Mark Scott was Managing Director in 2015 @smh pic.twitter.com/nxNGrWamGp
The board of the ABC appointed former media executive Cameron late last year.
In February, she found ABC News had breached its editorial guidelines of accuracy and impartiality in a radio report about a community meeting in Alice Springs.
