Nine Entertainment has defended the decision to publish an advertisement worth $20,000 from Clive Palmer’s Trumpet of Patriots party on the front page of the Age, saying any other decision might imply it endorsed the sentiments of political ads.
But staff and readers have criticised the Age for running the ad, which says “There are only two genders”, while calling the billionaire “a persistent wart on the foot of Australian politics” in an editorial on the same day.
The editorial criticised “the recurring irritant” for his promise to spend more than $1m in advertising before the election, “once again using his wealth to broadcast slogans on television, radio and the front pages of newspapers”.
“The claim in the advertisement, made without context or nuance, is simplistic and hurtful to many,” the editorial said.
In a letter to staff on Wednesday, Nine’s executive editor, Luke McIlveen, and managing director publishing, Tory Maguire, argued that rejecting a political advertisement might lead to accusations that the newspaper endorsed anything it published.
“It is abundantly clear in any political ad that it is authorised by a representative of a political party registered with the AEC and is not reflective of any editorial position,” the letter said.
“If we were to start picking and choosing which platforms of a registered political party were acceptable, that could imply endorsement of any political ads we did choose to run, and would insert our organisation into the political debate as a participant rather than observer.”
McIlveen and Maguire acknowledged the “discomfort and distress” the ad caused and said the decision was not taken lightly, with “deep consideration in the business”.
They said the Age’s charter of editorial independence “provides both the newsroom and management of Nine Publishing protection against accusations of political or commercial interference”.
“It can also lead to deeply uncomfortable situations, including when the newsroom rightly exercises its prerogative … for fearless journalism, unencumbered by commercial pressures.”
The letter was a reply to journalists who wrote a formal letter of complaint to management after discovering the gender ad was due to be published on the front page of the Age on Wednesday.
Sources say the paper has received 200 complaints about the decision, with some threatening to cancel their subscription.
“Calling Palmer a wart on the foot of the nation makes zero difference when you’ve already taken his advertising money,” one reader commented under the online version of the editorial.
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will … happily publish anything if you pay for it – Voltaire’s mate,” wrote another.
“The editor’s opinion rings a little hollow given that The Age has published Palmer’s latest ugly advertisement on the front page,” another reader said. “I guess profit takes precedence over principle.”
“If the Age accepts the money, and publishes, they are profiting from something they admit is ‘simplistic and hurtful to many people’ and is ‘an unhelpful and provocative contribution to the national discussion’, a reader wrote.
On Facebook, the Age blocked comments on posts about the front page or Palmer.
Palmer has had multiple advertisements that are critical of immigration and welcome to country ceremonies published across News Corp and Nine newspapers.
The Newcastle Herald, published by Australian Community Media, apologised for putting the “only two genders” ad on its front page on Tuesday, removing it from the digital edition within hours.
The ad placed by Palmer’s new party says: “We must stop confusing children in schools. Give them a safe and normal environment to grow and develop in and let them decide who they are when they become adults.”
Palmer spent close to $100m campaigning before the 2022 federal election and took out a huge amount of advertising in the same trademark yellow, but his United Australia party’s primary vote was only 4.7% across the country.
In 2021 Nine rejected ads from Palmer that it considered contravened government-issued health advice on vaccines, but accepted anti-lockdown ads.
Nine declined to comment.
• This story was amended on 13 March 2025. The advertisement cost $20,000, not $200,000 as originally reported.
