Read Gerard Henderson’s Media Watch Dog column every Saturday morning on SkyNews.com.au and watch his weekly analysis on The Media Show.
The LatestThank God for “Tom”
Wasn’t it just great to see relatively new ABC Chair Kim Williams on Sky News’ The Kenny Report on Thursday 16 July?
In recent times chairs and managing directors at the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster have declined to appear on Australia’s only pay-TV subscription news service. However, it should be said that the position of ABC Chair is not that significant.
Look at it this way. The government appoints the ABC chair and the board. Except for the staff-elected board member (currently Laura Tingle). The board chooses the managing director who is also editor-in-chief (currently Hugh Marks). The managing director is supposed to run the joint but, for many decades, the ABC has been a staff collective – or soviet – run by its left-wing staff. That’s how the ABC became a conservative-free-zone – without one conservative presenter, producer or editor for any of its prominent television, radio or online outlets. Not one – or, if there is, ABC management or leading ABC staff will not identify the person or persons.
The highlight of the Kenny-Williams exchange occurred when the former asked the latter about the lack of political conservatives as presenters. He pointed out, for example, that Phillip Adams presented Late Night Live on Radio National between 1990 and 2024 and was replaced in 2024 by David Marr. Both left-wing comrades.
It was at this stage that the following exchange took place:
Kim Williams: Well, there, there are a number of people at the ABC that have a diversity of views. I’m not here to give individual report cards on commentators or or personalities at the ABC. It’d be highly inappropriate for me to do that, and you know that.
Chris Kenny: But if it’s okay to have a prominent host who’s avowedly green left, no problem with it. You’ve got no, I’ve got no problem with that, as long as you can also have some right of centre hosts, which you don’t have.
Kim Williams: Well, we have had people of an avowed conservative persuasion on the ABC –
Chris Kenny: As what, as guests?
Kim Williams: No, as from time to time in, I mean, you remember when Tom was there.
Chris Kenny: Tom Switzer?
Kim Williams: Yes.
Chris Kenny: For his one program a week on Radio National?
Kim Williams: Well, it was a pretty good program.
Chris Kenny: It was a pretty good program, and I’ve had some very interesting discussions with him about how hard it was to get people like Bjorn Lomborg onto the ABC. The internal resistance was excruciating.
Kim Williams: Well, again, I can’t debate that with you because it precedes my time at the ABC…
How about that? The ABC chair thought, and he thought, and he thought. And he came up with the name “Tom”. Kenny filled in the surname. It was Switzer – who presented the program Between the Lines once a week on ABC Radio National between 2015 and 2023 on ABC Radio National. It aired at 5.30 pm on a Saturday. Hardly prime time. That’s all that Mr Williams could come up with to try to demonstrate that there is viewpoint diversity among ABC presenters – a presenter who is a critic of President Trump and has not been on the ABC payroll for around two years. What’s more, while Switzer appreciated his time on the ABC he is known to have become frustrated by the attempts by ABC management and some producers to restrict or prevent some political conservatives from appearing on Between the Lines.
Needless to say, all of this is not Williams’ fault. He has only been the ABC chair since March 2024. Moreover, as mentioned above, ABC chairs do not run the ABC – nor do the board members. Nor should they – this is not the role of a chair or his/her board.
The only problem with Kim Williams in this regard turns on the fact that he is in denial about the issue.
Set out below is a list comprising presenters of the ABC’s main news and current affairs programs along with some editors who appear regularly on news and current affairs programs:
Sally Sara (RN Breakfast), Raf Epstein (Melbourne Mornings), Craig Reucassel (Sydney Breakfast), Charlie Pickering (The Weekly, Melbourne Drive), David Marr (Late Night Live) Laura Tingle (Global Affairs Editor, ABC Board), Bridget Brennan (News Breakfast), James Glenday (News Breakfast), Sarah Ferguson (7.30), David Speers (Insiders) Andy Park (The World Today), Julian Morrow (Sunday Extra), John Barron (Planet America), Chas Licciardello (Planet America), Patricia Karvelas (Afternoon Briefing) Hamish Macdonald (Sydney Mornings), Norman Swan (The Health Report), Nick Bryant (Saturday Extra), Matt Bevan (If You’re Listening), Melissa Clarke (AM) Fran Kelly (The Radio National Hour), Linton Besser (Media Watch), Annabel Crabb (Kitchen Cabinet), Leigh Sales (Australian Story), John Lyons (Americas Editor)
Please note Kim Williams. Not all of the prominent ABC journalists above are leftists. But there is not one political conservative among this lot.
The Kenny/Williams exchange was a civil one. Neither interrupted each other.
Unlike, say, Sarah Ferguson’s 34 interruptions of Liberal Party leader Angus Taylor recently. Re which see MWD Issue 778.
However, towards the end of the allocated time, Williams expressed the view that he had not been given sufficient time to discuss the importance of the ABC to Australian life. He mentioned Play School, which has been on-air since 1966.
Now Kim Williams has a background in the media. He surely knows that the successful Play School program is in no sense news on a breakfast program. However, the fact that the ABC Chair took refuge in Play School serves as a reminder that around 90 per cent of complaints made to the ABC relate to its news and current affairs programs. Not to Play School or the taxpayer-funded broadcaster’s coverage of regional and rural Australia.
Chris Kenny invited Kim Williams to return to Sky News in six months’ time (by then its name will have changed to News24) to discuss how well the ABC has done in areas other than news and current affairs. How frightfully interesting. MWD can barely wait – as the saying goes.
Can You Bear It?The ABC & Jennifer Westacott
On Wednesday, Western Sydney University Chancellor Jennifer Westacott, in her submission to the Royal Commission on anti-semitism and social cohesion, criticised some university chancellors for failing to tackle anti-Semitism on their campuses. This is how the story was covered by ABC Radio News. The reporter was Conor Duffy. The date was Thursday 16 July:
Conor Duffy: In a personal submission to the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion, Professor Jennifer Westacott said Jewish students and staff had lost their safety on campus. Professor Westacott accused universities of hiding behind free speech and academic freedom protections to allow abhorrent placards, some of which called for the murder of Jews. She said this was a whole-of-nation failure caused by a lack of collective leadership. Professor Westacott holds a role with the Dor Foundation, a Jewish not-for-profit organisation.
Professor Westacott is not Jewish. Her role at the not-for-profit Dor Foundation bears no relationship whatsoever to her stance on anti-Semitism in Australian universities. It could be that the ABC ran this reference to soften Professor Westacott’s criticism of such institutions as the University of Sydney where one-time ABC managing director and editor-in-chief Mark Scott is vice-chancellor. Can You Bear It?
SMH Letters Page & Sky News’ “Lunacy”
There has been enormous interest in MWD’s analysis of the Sydney Morning Herald’s Letters Page – which features lightweight rants against political conservatives and is all but devoid of letters from political conservatives.
Following up on the Sydney Morning Herald’s Letters Page this is what the Letters editor chose to publish on Thursday 16 July – following a report in the SMH the previous day of Malcolm Turnbull rant against Sky News – under the heading “Murdoch mischief”.
Malcolm Turnbull’s scathing comments about Rupert Murdoch are well and truly warranted. The disastrous legacy of his support for Brexit, Trump and climate change denial is obvious. The lunacy of Sky News, the hatred of the ABC and continual bias of his print publications needs to be more fully exposed. It is indeed time for a royal commission into the selfish and reckless influence of this foreigner and his companies.
Ted Hemmens, Cromer
So there you have it. The SMH Letters editor reckons it is appropriate to run a letter from a reader living in the well-off Sydney suburb of Cromer declaring that Sky News is for lunatics. Clever criticism, don’t you think? Or could it be that Comrade Hemmens reckons that it’s lunacy to pay money to watch Sky News when you can watch the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster for free? And how intemperate the reference to Rupert Murdoch as “this foreigner”. How xenophobic can a SMH Letters Page contributor get? Can You Bear It?
Malcolm Turnbull launches a book on Rupert Murdoch while advising others to ignore News Corp
While on the topic of Rupert Murdoch, did anyone read Colin Jaspan’s report in Nine’s The Age and Sydney Morning Herald on 14 July titled “Malcolm Turnbull urges Australians to ignore Rupert Murdoch’s media empire”.
It seems that Comrade Jaspan obtained access to a private launch of the book by Andrew Dodd and Matthew Ricketson titled Getting Murdoched which was referred to in last week’s MWD.
The launcher was, oh yes, Malcolm Turnbull who used the occasion to fang Rupert Murdoch and all his works and all his pomps – to use a dated phrase.
Ellie’s (male) co-owner just loved this quote from your man Turnbull’s launch of Getting Murdoched:
In a sense, we’ve got to start treating the rantings on the Murdoch media, particularly Sky News after Dark, the way you treat the drunk that you see late on a Saturday night, raving and screaming and raging at the moon outside a pub. You know? Oh, OK, right, just carefully step by them, hopefully he doesn’t vomit on you or something, and that’s basically – you’ve got to basically ignore it.
How’s that for good advice? The Sage of Point Piper travelled to Melbourne for the private launch it seems, where he, according to Jaspan’s report, called for Australians to ignore News Corp. Fancy that. Perhaps he should have advised the learned taxpayer-subsidised academics who co-authored Getting Murdoched not to write the tome.
MWD took special note of this part of Jaspan’s report:
Speaking at the launch event for a new book on the media empire Murdoch has built over seven decades, the former politician critiqued the 95-year-old’s legacy and urged the audience to “evict” him from living “rent-free” in the heads of the nation’s politics, media and public life.
The term “living rent free” in someone’s head has become an over-used cliché in recent times. But Turnbull’s obsession with Murdoch suggests that the latter is alive and well in the former’s head. Yet, alas, the Sage of Point Piper seems unaware of this. Can You Bear It?
David Marr reveals his prejudices once again – this time perhaps unintentionally
Last week, Media Watch Dog carried an account of how Late Night Live presenter David Marr had admitted to his prejudices when criticising Liberal Party leader Angus Taylor and the Coalition’s policies. He did so when interviewing Mark Kenny.
On Monday 13 July, once again, David Marr interviewed left-wing academic Mark Kenny about the previous week in Australian national politics. The two referred to the latest Resolve Political Monitor – including support for the ABC and Net Zero – which was published in Nine Newspapers on 12 July.
This is what David Marr said about the ABC and the Resolve Political Monitor:
David Marr: And there is some really wonderful news for, you know, 40 per cent of Australians polled disagree with the notion of reducing funding for the ABC.
And this is what David Marr said about Resolve Political Monitor and Net Zero:
David Marr: But what about the last on that list? Absolutely fascinating. This is a poll of Australians. Net Zero should be dropped, said Pauline, with a focus on fossil fuels over renewables in the future. Support for that, 39 per cent. So, there is over 60 per cent of the country either unsure or opposed, and yet that is at the core of her policies but, of course, Angus Taylor’s policies as well.
So, David Marr (an ABC employee) is excited that 40 per cent of Australians disagree with reducing ABC funding. But David Marr (a Net Zero supporter) is also excited when 39 per cent of Australians agree that Net Zero should be dropped and Australia should focus on fossil fuels. This despite the fact that Comrade Marr supports Net Zero and opposes fossil fuels.
How’s that for a double standard? 40 per cent is high when accounting for ABC supporters. But 39 per cent is low when accounting for Net Zero opponents. And here’s another question: Can You Bear It?
Nine Newspapers’ Nick Bryant fantasises about Australian and British politics
Lotsa thanks to the avid reader who drew MWD’s attention to Nick Bryant’s column in last Saturday’s Sydney Morning Herald which was carried the next day in the Sunday Age.
Comrade Bryant, a former BBC correspondent, who now seems to call Australia home, is a fine interviewer. He presents “Saturday Extra” on Radio National. It’s well worth a listen at Hangover Time each week – even if your man Bryant does not always live up to his promise to bring viewpoint diversity to his program. For example, not so long ago, he presided over a discussion on the future of the Liberal Party with two vehement critics of the contemporary Liberal Party – namely Frank Bongiorno and Judith Brett. Also, Saturday Extra occasionally provides great copy for MWD.
But MWD digresses. The Bryant column last Saturday was called “Canberra never called… but why?”. The British citizen and Australian resident used the move of Andy Burnham, from being mayor of Manchester and now on the way to becoming prime minister of Great Britain, as a model which Australia should follow.
In a somewhat over-written piece, Bryant referred to “the nasal knight” (Sir Keir Starmer), “Rome on the Thames” (London), “The Wizard of Oz” (Sir Lynton Crosby), “billabongs” (Canberra), “the bush capital” (Canberra again), “The King of Westralia” (Mark McGowan), “the Queen of Queensland” (Annastacia Palaszczuk), “the Game of Thrones” (with reference to the fictional Westeros), “Manchesterism”, “Adelaidism”, “Perthism”, and “Brisbanism”. Groan [Did he mention Bryantism, I wonder? – MWD Editor].
Nick Bryant’s point, if point there was, is that talented one-time State premiers such as McGowan, Palaszczuk, Gladys Berejiklian, Peter Beattie, Jeff Kennett, Steve Bracks, Mike Baird, Jay Weatherill, Geoff Gallop, Colin Barnett, Chris Minns, Peter Malinauskas and David Crisafulli should have – or should – enter Federal politics. He points to the fact that former NSW premier Bob Carr moved into Federal politics and became foreign minister for a while.
What Bryant fails to understand is that all (except Carr) would have had to stand down from State politics, find a safe seat they could contest, and enter Federal politics intent on taking over from the prime minister or Opposition leader. It isn’t easy. Especially with Australia’s preferential voting system where election results are usually relatively close – even in some by-elections.
It was easy for Bob Carr – since he filled a Senate vacancy and was chosen by the NSW Labor party without going to an election. Also, Bryant overlooked the fact that one-time NSW Liberal Party premier John Fahey moved into Federal politics after he stepped down from State politics and became a successful finance minister in the John Howard-led Coalition government. Likewise, Joseph Lyons, Australia’s successful prime minister in the 1930s who commenced his political career in Tasmanian State politics, becoming premier.
Bryant did mention the ill-fated attempt by Nationals Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen to enter federal politics in 1987 but did not draw the correct lessons from it. Namely, that it was a disaster for all but the Labor Party
Your man Bryant would be advised to steer clear away from commentary on Australian national politics. His book The Rise and Fall of Australia was a piss-poor attempt at writing about the topic. And now the Englishman’s at it again. Can You Bear It?
[No, not really – now that you ask. I note that Bryant’s column in the SMH Online concludes with this sentence: “A Beattie, Berejiklian, or Bracks might have been an Australian Andy Burnham.” This is a mere wish-fulfillment. After all, we do not have a clue whether Comrade Burnham will be a successful Labour prime minister. – MWD Editor.]
An ABC Update
Sarah Ferguson’s interview with Angus Taylor even criticised the left-wing Crikey
When 7.30 presenter Sarah Ferguson interviewed Opposition leader Angus Taylor on 14 May, she interrupted him on 34 occasions. Re which see MWD Issue 776. When there was second round on 14 July, Comrade Ferguson only interrupted the Opposition leader on 18 occasions. In recent interviews, the 7.30 presenter rarely interrupted the Prime Minister or the Treasurer.
As avid readers know, the next election could take place as late as May 2028. Yet Ferguson was insistent that Taylor advise about how he would deal with Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party, in nearly two years’ time. Let’s go to the transcript when the interviewer refers on two occasions to Taylor’s recent speech to The Sydney Institute as taking place on Friday 10 July. It was Thursday 9 July:
Sarah Ferguson: Let me go then to the speech that you made on Friday that I referenced at the top of the show. This is the existential struggle with One Nation. You said their policies would lead to quote “an eternity of pain,” is your phrase. Given that you’ve now laid down this marker, do you categorically rule out doing a deal with One Nation to form government?
Angus Taylor: Oh, we’ve got absolutely no plan for a deal with One Nation to form government. We want to form government in our own right, in our Coalition, the Liberal and National Party Coalition on the back of a strong plan and a strong team, Sarah….
Sarah Ferguson: Don’t Liberal voters have a right to know that this party that would cause, as you describe it, an eternity of pain is one you would never form government with under any circumstances?
Angus Taylor: Well, as I say, we’ve got absolutely no plan to form government with a party…
Sarah Ferguson: It’s not quite the same as ruling it out is what I’m looking for.
Angus Taylor: As I say, I want a coalition with the National Party not just going into the next election but post the next election in government. That’s the plan. There’s no ambiguity about that. And can I explain why?
Sarah Ferguson: No, I just want to be absolutely clear about the ambiguity here. You say that there is no ambiguity, but I’m asking you to rule it out as an option. Doesn’t leaving it unruled out leave it on the table.
Angus Taylor: I’m ruling it out. There’s no plan. There’s no plan.
Sarah Ferguson: You’re ruling it out.
Angus Taylor: Well, there is no plan. I can tell you right now, and I have been very clear about this a hundred times. I don’t know how many times, but many, many times….
Sarah Ferguson: So if you will allow me just one more time to pose the question, because there is a slight difference between there is no plan and I, Angus Taylor, as the leader of the Liberal Party, am ruling out forming government with One Nation.
Angus Taylor: Well, I’ve already done that.
Sarah Ferguson: You ruled out.
Angus Taylor: And I’ve said that there is no plan to form any kind of coalition with One Nation…
To there you have it. The 7.30 presenter asked the Opposition leader the same question on seven occasions about what he might do circa May 2028. And she would not take “no” for an answer.
This is poor, boring journalism. As Rachel Withers commented in the left-wing newsletter Crikey on 15 July:
An incessant Sarah Ferguson demanded Angus Taylor “rule out” governing with One Nation on ABC’s 7.30 – an inane ask about a hypothetical situation. She’d be better of asking him about things he is actually doing.
Five Paws Award
Media Watch Dog’s Five Paws Award was inaugurated in Issue Number 26 (4 September 2009) during the time of Nancy (2004-2017). The first winner was ABC TV presenter Emma Alberici. Ms Alberici scored for remembering the Nazi-Soviet Pact of 23 August 1939 whereby Hitler and Stalin divided Eastern Europe between Germany and the Soviet Union. And for stating that the Nazi-Soviet Pact had effectively started the Second World War, since it was immediately followed by Germany’s invasion of Poland from the West (at a time when the Soviet Union had become an ally of Germany). Soon after, the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the East. Over the years, the late Nancy’s Five Paws Award has become one of the world’s most prestigious gongs – rating just below the Nobel Prize and the Academy Awards.
Following Andrew Probyn’s lead, Sarah Martin & Jacob Greber acknowledge that the media would have been tougher on Angus Taylor than Anthony Albanese if Taylor commented on women the way the Prime Minister did
Wasn’t it oh-so-interesting to see Andrew Probyn back on the ABC TV Insiders couch last Sunday? It’s just on three years since your man Probyn was made redundant by the ABC for something or other – apparently related to his insistence that there should remain a fridge containing beer for relaxation purposes for post-work Friday drinks. But he was soon employed by Nine Entertainment and is now the national affairs editor of Nine News and based in Canberra.
Ellie’s (male) co-owner stands – and sometimes sits – to be corrected. But Hendo reckons that this is the first time Comrade Probyn has sat on the Insiders’ couch since he left the ABC Building. It would appear that Comrade Probyn had 3 years in the ABC Sin Bin – and that, at last, all is now forgiven. However, for what reason it is not clear. [I thought this was all about your man Probyn’s commitment to life on Friday evenings as a fridge-dweller. – MWD Editor.]
But MWD digresses – not for the first time. On Sunday 12 July, Insiders’ presenter David (“Please call me Speersy”) Speers was on what journalists like to call a W.E.B. (or Well Earned Break) – or something like that. So, Patricia (“Please call me PK”) Karvelas stood in for Speersy. The panelists comprised your man Probyn (Nine), Jacob Greber (ABC) and Sarah (“Pauline Hanson’s daughter should not be employed as a One Nation staffer irrespective of her qualifications”) Martin (The Guardian) plus the presenter.
It was a great example of The Guardian/ABC Axis in action – comprising PK, Greber and Martin. A 75 per cent contribution from The Guardian/ABC Axis to the Insiders couch.
Discussion turned on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s interview with podcaster Nikki Osborne who, in the words of the late Barry Humphries, identifies as a comedian. This is what was said in part, commencing with the Australian prime minister’s account of his recent meeting with the Japanese prime minister in Canberra.
Anthony Albanese: The Japanese prime minister brought a melon.
Nikki Osborne: How did he get that through customs?
Anthony Albanese: She. It’s a royal melon.
Nikki Osborne: Oh, she smuggled. It was a she?
Anthony Albanese: She.
Nikki Osborne: Did she smuggle it?
Anthony Albanese: I don’t know, I don’t know.
Nikki Osborne: Ohhh I’m expecting.
Anthony Albanese: Got a couple of melons.
Nikki Osborne: She brought two.
Anthony Albanese: She brought two, as you do.
Nikki Osborne: She just came in looking like Pamela Anderson.
Patricia Karvelas: Okay, Sarah. He’s apologised. It’s obvious to me why he had to apologise just watching that, but how big a blunder was this?
Sarah Martin: I mean, you know, that combined with the Kylie [Minogue] thing, I think is a blunder….
How about that? Comedian Osborne got to meet Anthony Albanese at The Lodge without knowing that the Japanese prime minister was a woman. And what about the responses? MWD hears avid readers cry. Martin said the Prime Minister’s comments were a blunder. Then Probyn concurred. Then Greber said the PM’s comments were “silly” but the “whole thing had become a media beat-up”. PK did not agree. Then Martin declared that the comments were not “deeply offensive” – just kind of stupid. Then Martin said the comments amounted to “casual misogyny”. PK agreed. This is how the discussion concluded:
Sarah Martin: I mean, it is casual misogyny. Like, if that had been said about Julia Gillard when she was prime minister – then people, you know, like it is casual misogyny. Sorry, guys, it is.
Patricia Karvelas: Yeah.
Andrew Probyn: I just think that, all I’m thinking is that
Patricia Karvelas: I’m going with Sarah.
Sarah Martin: Yeah. Okay.
Andrew Probyn: If Angus Taylor had said it, there would be a bigger reaction in certain parts of the media.
Patricia Karvelas: Mmm.
Sarah Martin: True.
Jacob Greber: Or if Scott Morrison, or someone like that.
Patricia Karvelas: But he did get a reaction.
Jacob Greber: He got it. Yeah. He’s been beaten for it all week. And he had to apologise – which you pointed out earlier. He rarely does.
Patricia Karvelas: Yeah, and it’s an unequivocal apology.
Sarah Martin: And it came out really quickly.
Patricia Karvelas: On the Monday. That’s right.
Interesting eh? Three members of the Canberra Press Gallery – Comrades Probyn, Martin and Greber expressed the view that if Angus Taylor or Scott Morrison had spoken about women to a podcaster the way Anthony Albanese did, there would have been a bigger reaction in certain parts of the media. This means, presumably, The Age and Sydney Morning Herald plus ABC and SBS and, yes – even The Guardian Australia (Comrade Martin’s newspaper).
But it was Andrew Probyn who initiated this discussion about the media and made the hard point. For which:
Andrew Probyn – Five Paws.
[A good decision to be sure. A well-earned gong. By the way, I note that Comrades Karvelas and Martin agreed that the PM issued a really quick unequivocal apology. Not so. The Albanese/Osborne exchange was first reported in The Weekend Australian and News Corp tabloids on Saturday 4 July. And the apology was issued on Monday 6 July. Nine’s newspaper first covered the issue on Tuesday 7 July – as did Guardian Australia. Enough said. – MWD Editor.]
New Segment – An Avid Reader WritesThe Geoffrey Robertson KC & David Marr accents compared
As Media Watch Dog readers know, they and their fellow readers like to ask questions in order to gain knowledge.
A certain Doctor X sent this email to Ellie and her co-owner at around Gin & Tonic time on Friday 10 July. Doctor X – for a real medical doctor he is and, consequently, of use if someone has a heart attack – had this to say:
Dear Ellie, and co-owners
I think we may need to call in Kel Richards to adjudicate on the use of the faux accents by these well to do media types. First, we had the “Epping” accent of Geoffrey Roberston KC, and now the “Pymble” accent of David Marr! Is the latter self-proclaimed? I must admit ignorance to the latter, and familiarity with the former (replete with derhotacised “Rs”) courtesy of GH (AC).
Surely there is a cure for this malady, all it takes is to work, for a while, south west of the “Red Rooster” line in Sydney. And, in the case of D Marr, a good dose of nasal decongestant.
P.S Do you know how long it took for me to stop saying “haitch”? Curse those Irish nuns at my Catholic primary school!
Signed X
Ellie replies
Many thanks for your email which you also forwarded to my (male) co-owner and thanks for the reference to his AC (aka Always Courteous). Here is what I have to say after checking out with them.
As you know, when Media Watch Dog referred to Geoffrey Robertson KC as having an Epping accent, it had in mind the attempt at an English upper class accent by a pompous and progressive lawyer in fashionable London who subsequently (of course) tries to disguise the fact that he grew up in the middle class suburb of Epping in suburban Sydney.
As to David Marr’s Pymble accent – well he self-declared this in February 2025 soon after he took over as presenter of ABC Radio National’s Late Night Live – or, as my male co-owner calls it, Late Night Left. Hendo heard Mr Marr say this when he walked me around the block late one summer night. I did not hear anything because I’m a deaf canine.
Marr described the male Pymble accent as that of someone who is not afraid to declare that he grew up in the upper class North Shore Sydney Protestant environment. And who caught the North Shore line train to attend Shore (the Sydney Church of England Grammar School) in North Sydney. See MWD Issue 717, 28 February 2025.
Thank you for your attention to this matter – as a well-known former New York property developer would say, in a Queens accent.
PS: In his covering title, the Real Doctor referred to possibly having been “perhaps late of Tunbridge Wells”. Whatever could that mean? Or is the answer that his email was sent about Gin & Tonic time? As to the “derhotacised” reference – well that’s just surgeon-flashing.
Nancy’s Courtesy Classes
As avid readers are aware, the late Nancy (2004-2017) did not die. In modern terminology, she merely “passed” on to the Other Side. Hence MWD has been able to keep in touch and seek Nancy’s advice about behaviour, courtesy and all that – with the help of the American psychic John Edward of Crossing Over fame who has a direct line to the recently departed. Or so it seems. Sadly, MWD missed Mr Edward’s recent visit to Australia which – believe it or not – was publicised on ABC TV’s News Breakfast.
Professor Fran Kelly fails to temper Professor Tim McCormack’s anger towards the Trump administration
Avid Media Watch Dog readers have asked: Whatever happened to Fran (“I’m an activist”) Kelly in recent times – and why is she not getting a guernsey in MWD?
Well, the truth is that MWD has not focused on Comrade Kelly in recent years – since Ellie’s (male) co-owner has not spent much time following her new gig The Radio National Hour which goes to air from 6 pm on weekdays.
As MWD has mentioned previously, the activist Kelly is one of many ABC journalists who, when they step down from their long-term program, don’t really retire – and in time they re-emerge. A bit like guests at the mythical Hotel California – you can check out any time you like but you can never leave.
So, this year it was no surprise that Comrade Kelly re-emerged to host The Radio National Hour – which she claims is a thoughtful deep-dive into important and challenging issues. But is it really?
On 14 July Fran Kelly interviewed Tim McCormack, the Professor of Law at the University of Tasmania. He is a former Special Adviser on War Crimes to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
Fran Kelly chose to interview Professor McCormack about the decision of the Trump administration to declare the ICC off-limits with respect to US citizens. The US is not a signatory to the treaty. However, the learned professor, a former adviser to the ICC, is critical of the US decision announced recently by the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Quelle Surprise!
No other view was heard. As Comrade Kelly agreed with Professor McCormack and McCormack returned the favour by agreeing with Kelly. However, Ellie’s (male) co-owner was surprised that a University of Tasmania (where he once worked for a year) academic would use such dismissive and at times extreme language. Like this:
Fran Kelly: How would you characterise this latest threat from…
Tim McCormack: It’s definitely an escalation, Fran. You’re right that that the court’s been, been targeted as an institution under both Trump administrations. And Trump 2.0 has increased the, the pressure on the individual judges and prosecutors that have been sanctioned, and that’s been really devastating for them. But this latest escalation is a dramatic escalation, and just listening to the Secretary of State’s words, they’re about as hyperbolic as so much rhetoric that comes out of the Trump administration. Very little of it is based on any reality, but there you go. That never stops this administration saying what they want to say and assuming that their domestic audience will believe them.
Fran Kelly: Well, the U.S. Secretary of State also claimed in that video message, that U.S. police officers and border patrol agents and elected leaders could be dragged before the court for carrying out their duties to deport violent criminals to El Salvador, he said, and for striking narco-terrorists in international waters. Is he right? Could these actions, ordered by the Trump administration, constitute a crime under the ICC?
Tim McCormack: It’s almost total rubbish. Not quite, but it is total rubbish in terms of ICE deportations from the US to other countries.
Fran Kelly: So Tim, help us to understand one of the secretary of State’s core claims. Can the International Criminal Court override a nation’s own courts and their constitution, and if so, when and how?
Tim McCormack: No, it can’t…. And for me, the great tragedy of it all, of this escalation of Trump administration opposition to the ICC, is that the ICC is built on the back of the incredibly important precedents of Nuremberg and Tokyo, the two war crimes trials at the end of World War II, which only happened because of U.S. leadership in in that post World War II era. They, the United States of America, built a system of global justice. And now the very same country wants to put a wrecking ball through it. It’s absolute tragedy, in my view.
Fran Kelly: Tim McCormack, thank you very much for joining me.
Yeah. Lotsa thanks. MWD does not want to censor the learned professor. But surely a taxpayer subsidised academic should be able to use more moderate language to make his point – rather than words like “total rubbish”. Which, comes to think of it, sounds like MWD’s “absolute tosh”. But Professor McMormack is a university professor – not a street fighter. So it’s off to Nancy’s Courtesy Classes for Professor McCormack with the hope of putting in some balance in the soon-to-be-patient’s word usage.
* * * * *
Until Next time – in the meantime Keep Morale High
* * * * *