The submission asks the Commissioner, amongst other recommendations, not to accept or reinforce the proposal made by Special Envoy Ms Jillian Segal, that she should be given a special role in shaping the public broadcasters’ Editorial Policies or in monitoring their implementation.
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
ABC Alumni Limited represents a community of nearly 300 former staff and contracted employees of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) – many of them experienced reporters, editors, and senior news managers. We support fully funded, high quality, independent, ethical and free public media in Australia. Our objectives are to promote excellence across all media platforms through advocacy, education, mentoring, public forums and scholarships.
We are not funded by or formally connected in any other way to the ABC. This submission should not be taken to represent the views of the ABC, which may or may not make its own submission to the Royal Commission.
No serving officer or Board member of the ABC has been consulted in the compilation of this submission.
This submission has been endorsed by the ABC Alumni Board. Lead author is Jonathan Holmes with contributions from other Alumni. Special thanks to Helen Grasswill and Greg Wilesmith. Sent to the Royal Commission on 25 February 2026.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- This submission addresses the first of the Royal Commission’s terms of reference, which requires it “to tackle antisemitism by investigating the nature and prevalence of antisemitism in institutions and society, and its key drivers in Australia...”
- The relevance of the Special Envoy’s Plan to Combat Antisemitism (The Plan) Ms Jillian Segal’s role as advisor to the Royal Commission; ABC Alumni’s concerns about her sweeping proposals to curb antisemitism in cultural institutions, her recommendations regarding Australia’s public broadcasters and the challenge they pose to the broadcasters’ independence.
- The Public Broadcasters and the Segal Plan We list some of the remarks and recommendations concerning the public broadcasters, and the ‘legacy’ media more generally, in the Special Envoy’s Plan
- The Government’s response to the Segal Plan ABC Alumni are relieved that the government’s response does not mention the Special Envoy’s proposals to monitor the public broadcasters’ output. But her proposals are still part of the Plan and she is an official advisor to the Royal Commission.
- An allegedly “distorted narrative” in the ABC’s coverage of the Gaza conflict We examine the Special Envoy’s only publicly-expressed example of a “false/distorted narrative” in the ABC’s news output – one which allegedly fomented antisemitism in Australia. We submit that it is the Special Envoy, not the ABC, who has “distorted” the narrative about the explosion at the al-Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza on 23 October 2023 and its coverage by the ABC.
- The role of the Gaza conflict The Segal Plan does not even mention, as a contributory factor to the rise of antisemitism in Australia, the suffering inflicted on the people of Gaza by the Netanyahu government’s response to the 7 October 2023 atrocity by Hamas. This, we submit, is wilfully misleading.
- The influence of the “pro-Israel lobby” on the ABC The “pro-Israel lobby” and its remorseless criticism of the ABC’s Middle East correspondents and coverage. The ABC will frequently disagree with criticisms coming from one side of a contested conflict. The Antoinette Lattouf affair is an example of the damage done to the ABC’s reputation on an occasion when it was seen to succumb to pressure from pro-Israel complainants.
- The ABC’s Editorial Standards ABC Editorial Policies and Standards, which insist on accuracy and impartiality, are more comprehensive than any other media organisation’s. The ABC Board is also legally obliged to maintain its independence and integrity. Granting a specific power to the Special Envoy to monitor its compliance with its own editorial standards would jeopardise that independence.
- The ABC and antisemitism The ABC’s editorial policies and Guidance Notes deal comprehensively with racism, hate speech and terrorism. But the ABC is also obliged by law not to exclude significant strands of thought or belief – including sometimes strident criticism of Israel. This should not be equated with antisemitism. There is no evidence that ABC (or SBS) output has in any way fomented antisemitism in Australia.
- Conclusion ABC Alumni asks the Commissioner not to accept or reinforce the Special Envoy’s proposal that she should be given a special role in shaping the public broadcasters’ Editorial Policies or in monitoring their implementation.
1. The Royal Commission’s terms of reference
1.1 This submission addresses issues that come within the Royal Commission’s first term of reference, which requires the Commissioner to “tackle antisemitism by investigating the nature and prevalence of antisemitism in institutions and society, and its key drivers in Australia...”
1.2 In particular, the submission addresses certain proposals and recommendations contained in the Plan to Combat Antisemitism, published in July 2025 by Australia’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, Ms Jillian Segal AO.
2. The relevance of the Special Envoy’s Plan to Combat Antisemitism
2.1 ABC Alumni notes that Ms Segal accompanied the Prime Minister when he announced the establishment of this Royal Commission on 8 January 2026. Mr Albanese told a press conference that day that “…Jillian [Segal] will play an important role in giving advice to the Royal Commission as it proceeds with its important work.”[1]
2.2 The Commissioner, of course, will decide whether to accept Ms Segal’s advice, in whole or in part. The public, however, already has an understanding of Ms Segal’s thoughts on the “nature and prevalence of antisemitism in institutions and society, and its key drivers in Australia”, thanks to the publication in July 2025 of her Plan to Combat Antisemitism [hereafter ‘The Plan’]. [2]
2.3 ABC Alumni accepts that antisemitism is increasingly prevalent in Australia. We, like all Australians, were horrified by the antisemitic attack on the Channukah ceremony in Bondi which cost 15 innocent lives.
2.4 We submit, however, that the Plan all but ignores one of the major current drivers of antisemitism: the decisions of the Israeli government and the actions of the IDF in the Gaza conflict (see section 6 below).
2.5 We are also deeply disturbed by some of the measures the Special Envoy deems necessary, or at least efficacious, in combatting antisemitism.
2.6 Others will no doubt cover in their submissions Ms Segal’s proposals for dealing with what she perceives to be rampant antisemitism in Australian universities and cultural institutions. We only note here that she presents no evidence, other than the bald assertion, that antisemitism has “become ingrained and normalised within academia and the cultural space”. (The Plan 2.3)
2.7 The complete collapse of Adelaide Writers Week, and before that of the Bendigo Writers Festival, has demonstrated, we submit, the danger of attempts (however well-meaning) to ensure that cultural institutions are not “used to promote division or spread false/distorted narratives.” (The Plan 3.7)
2.8 Our concern in this submission, however, is to highlight the emphasis placed in the Plan on the role of public broadcasters, and the grave danger posed to their independence and impartiality by the measures it proposes.
3. The Public Broadcasters in the Segal Plan
3.1 The Segal Plan makes several mentions of Australia’s ‘legacy media’, and its role in fomenting or failing to combat antisemitism.
3.2 For example, in the second paragraph of The Plan, Ms Segal writes this:
Since 7 October 2023, antisemitism has risen to deeply troubling levels in Australia. This has been driven by conflict in the Middle East, manipulated narratives in the legacy media and social media and the spread of extremist ideologies. (The Plan p 2)
3.3 More particularly, The Plan focuses several times specifically on “public broadcasters” (by which is meant, presumably, the ABC and SBS.) Some examples:
Publicly funded media organisations should be required to uphold clear editorial standards that promote fair, responsible reporting to avoid perpetuating incorrect or distorted narratives or representations of Jews. (The Plan section 3.3 on page 8)
The Envoy will monitor media organisations to encourage accurate, fair and responsible reporting and assist them to meet their editorial standards and commitment to impartiality and balance and to avoid accepting false or distorted narratives. (‘Key Action’ in The Plan section 3.3 on page 8)
Publicly funded institutions like arts festivals, galleries and public broadcasters must uphold anti-discrimination values and be accountable for the narratives they promote.
While freedom of expression, particularly artistic expression, is vital to cultural richness and should be protected, funding provided by Australian taxpayers should not be used to promote division or spread false/distorted narratives. (The Plan section 3.7 on page 11)
The Envoy Office will work with the publicly funded broadcasters to encourage them to develop programs that add to social cohesion. (The Plan section 3.7 on page 11)
4. The Government’s Response to the Segal Plan
4.1 The Department of Home Affairs published its formal response to the Plan on 18 December 2025, a few days after the Bondi massacre. The Introduction, signed by the Prime Minister, the Minister of Multicultural Affairs and the Home Affairs Minister, says this: The Australian Government adopts the Plan to Combat Antisemitism and will work through the implementation of the 13 recommendations in consultation with the Jewish Australian community.
4.2 The Plan does contain 13 numbered sections, but its recommendations are not clearly stated or numbered. ABC Alumni is relieved to note, however, that none of Ms Segal’s observations and recommendations concerning the public broadcasters or media organisations, as listed above, are mentioned in the government’s response.
4.3 SBS is mentioned only in connection to a promised increase in funding for its podcast SBS Examines, because of its role in enhancing social cohesion. Substantial additional funding is promised to the Community Broadcasting Foundation. ABC Alumni welcomes both these proposals.
4.4 The ABC is not mentioned at all in the response.
4.5 Nevertheless, Ms Segal’s Plan contains the recommendations in section 3 above, and as an official advisor to the Royal Commission, it is to be expected that she may seek to have them addressed in the Commission’s final report. We believe, therefore, that the points we make in this submission are still crucially relevant.
5. An allegedly “distorted narrative” on the ABC
5.1 On the day The Plan was published (10 July 2025), Ms Segal appeared on the ABC TV’s 7.30 program. Several times she was asked by the program’s presenter Sarah Ferguson for examples of the “manipulated”, “false” or “distorted” narratives in the legacy media or the output of public broadcasters which, according to The Plan, were responsible at least in part for fomenting antisemitism. Ms Segal declined to give Ms Ferguson any specific examples. She simply said she was looking for “balance”. [3]
5.2 However, when asked the same question the next morning (11 July 2025) by Steve Cannane on ABC Radio National’s Breakfast Program, she came with one example prepared. It is worth quoting the relevant excerpt at some length, because it illustrates why ABC Alumni is so uneasy about Ms Segal’s Plan:
JILLIAN SEGAL: (01.41.10) I will give you an example – 6 months or so ago…the ABC ran a story repeatedly about a hospital in Gaza that had been bombed and there was incomplete information you know, only partial information from Hamas (?), but it was alleged to be, but the ABC reported it as fact, that it had been bombed by Israel. And then, you know, horrified people were upset and the Jewish community was looked on with disgust, and worse. And then it turned out indeed that it was not bombed by Israel, that it had been from Gaza itself, that it had been a bomb that had fallen short
STEVE CANNANE: I remember that case, but I remember it being the BBC, I don't remember it being the ABC…
JILLIAN SEGAL: No, ABC reported it in great detail repeatedly, and the correction, as always, is very very very small, just once off, and the impression is left that the Israelis bombed that hospital. That is where I’m saying “let’s stop, let’s think about the impression we are giving, and let’s make sure that the facts are accurate”, and the Israel-Gaza conflict has been an absolutely key study in that regard because the information coming out is largely coming from Gaza, and from unreliable sources, or not necessarily reliable sources, so this is what I’m saying, let’s be positive together let’s …make sure that we as a community are getting accurate and balanced information.[4]
5.3 This is the ONLY example of a “false” or “distorted” narrative offered to Steve Cannane or – so far as we are aware – to anyone else.
5.4 We submit that it is Ms Segal’s recounting of the incident which is a “false, distorted narrative”.
5.5 The incident – an explosion at the al-Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza – occurred, not “about six months” before the publication of The Plan in July 2025, but on the night of 17-18 October 2023, only days after Israel’s reprisals for the October 7 Hamas atrocities had begun. Ms Segal’s dates were out by well over a year.
5.6 Ms Segal did not mention that the ABC Ombudsman, Ms Fiona Cameron, had examined the episode in detail, and found in her report on 9 November 2023 that there had been no breach of the ABC’s standards on impartiality or accuracy. [5]
5.7 The ABC did not – except in one headline, subsequently corrected – report the allegations that the bombing of the hospital was an Israeli air strike “as fact”. The Reuters report on which the ABC’s story was based attributed that claim to “Gazan authorities”, as did the ABC.
5.8 Within an hour of the original report, the ABC reported that the IDF was denying responsibility, and it continued to do so for the next several days.
5.9 Ms Segal omits to mention (though Cannane reminds her) that the reason the information “coming out is largely from Gaza and from unreliable sources” is that the Israeli government has permitted no international journalists access to the Gaza strip since 7 October 2023. Media organisations have had to rely on information from the IDF and the Israeli government, the Gazan authorities under the control of Hamas, and on freelance Palestinian journalists in Gaza [dozens of whom have been killed since the conflict began[6]].
5.10 There was no certainty as to who or what was responsible for the explosion at the al-Ahli Arab Hospital for many days. There is still none. Ms Segal’s claim that it was caused by a faulty rocket fired by Islamist militants in Gaza may well be true but is still contested.[7]
5.11 Ms Segal omits to mention in the interview with Steve Cannane that since that incident, there have been many occasions when Israeli air strikes have indubitably caused severe damage to Gazan hospitals, killing and injuring patients and medical staff.
5.12 Usually, the IDF has claimed that Hamas was using the hospitals to store munitions or to shelter its fighters – claims which may or may not be true but which were invariably reported by the ABC.[8]
5.13 It seems extraordinary to us that Ms Segal should use this highly contested incident as her example of the ABC purveying “false narratives” that have exacerbated antisemitism in Australia, while her Plan entirely omits to mention as a significant factor Israel’s role in the Gazan conflict.
6. The role of the Gaza conflict in the rise of antisemitism In Australia
6.1 In section paragraph 3.2 above we quoted this passage in Ms Segal’s Foreword to The Plan:
However, since 7 October 2023, antisemitism has risen to deeply troubling levels in Australia. This has been driven by conflict in the Middle East, manipulated narratives in the legacy media and social media and the spread of extremist ideologies. (The Plan section 1 on page 2).
6.2 This, we believe, is the only instance in the entire Plan when “conflict in the Middle East” is mentioned as a causative factor in the rise of antisemitism in Australia. Even then, it is not so much the conflict itself, but “manipulated narratives” and “extremist ideologies” that The Plan claims have done the damage.
6.3 The section of The Plan that follows immediately on from the Foreword, Framing the Challenge, contains this sentence:
While the tragic events of 7 October 2023 brought an uprising of hatred directed at the Jewish community around the world, this insidious prejudice [antisemitism] had already been rising steadily in Australia… (The Plan section 2 on page 4)
6.4 It is our recollection – and, we submit, of the vast majority of Australians – that the brutal attack on Israel by Hamas on 7 October 2023 brought an upwelling of sympathy for Israel and for Jewish communities around the world.
6.5 Certainly, there was a small minority of Muslim, largely Arabic-speaking Australian residents who appeared to celebrate Hamas’s murderous rampage. But that was not what brought an estimated 90,000[9] Australians to march, in the pouring rain, across Sydney Harbour Bridge on 3 August 2025.
6.6 It was the scope and ferocity of Israel’s response to the events of 7 October 2023 in the intervening 22 months, we submit, that did that.
6.7 In the words of the Jewish-Australian writer Robert Manne:
For some two years Israel has been responsible for the deaths of an estimated 100,000 Palestinians in Gaza, some 80% of whom are civilians. The Gazan Ministry of Health has the names of 70,000 of the dead but according to several expert studies the death toll is much higher.[10] The dead include at least 20,000 children. Israel has killed more than 200 journalists whose only crime was to report honestly on what was happening in Gaza. Its forces have destroyed hospitals, universities and schools and, in whole or in part, an estimated 80% of the buildings in Gaza. Body parts lie strewn under the millions of tons of rubble. These Palestinians have faced daily fear of death by bombing while scrambling without dignity for food or sheltering in scraps of tents without protection from heat or cold or rain.[11]
6.8 ABC Alumni does not suggest that any but a small minority of pro-Palestinian protesters are motivated by antisemitism. Nor, of course, do we condone in any way the targeting of Australian Jews for abuse or intimidation, let alone murder, because of the actions of the government of Israel or its Defence Force.
6.9 But for a Plan whose purpose is to combat antisemitism in Australia not even to mention, as a possible causative factor, the suffering of tens of thousands of innocent civilian Gazans at the hands of the IDF seems to us wilfully misleading.
6.10 Yet the Plan’s author believes that she is a fit and proper person to assist the public broadcasters “to meet their editorial standards and commitment to impartiality and balance and to avoid accepting false or distorted narratives.”
6.11 That is something that the organisation which Ms Segal until recently led, and similar Jewish-Australian organisations, have been trying to do for decades.
7. The influence of the “pro-Israel lobby” on the ABC
7.1 Jillian Segal AO is the immediate past President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) which is, in its own words, “the peak body of the Australian Jewish community, representing and advocating for the community to government, in the community, and around the world.”[12]
7.2 That is, no doubt, one of the reasons why she was invited by the Prime Minister to become Australia’s first Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism.
7.3 Among the ECAJ’s declared policies (policy 32.5) is that it “reaffirms Australian Jewry’s strong and unshakeable solidarity with Israel and her people”.[13]
7.4 A separate but closely allied organisation is the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), which focuses more directly than ECAJ on (in its own words) “endeavours to highlight and counteract instances of anti-Israel bias and misinformation in the Australian media and wider public debate.”[14]
7.5 The Zionist Federation of Australia (ZFA) is another powerful affiliation which has, it says, “been building a strong Jewish community with a deep and enduring connection to Israel since 1927”.[15] It was the ZDF that urged the Prime Minister to invite the President of Israel, Isaac Herzog, to visit Australia in the wake of the Bondi massacre.
7.6 In New South Wales, the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies is active in arranging study tours to Israel for journalists and MPs, and in combating antisemitism in Australia.[16]
7.7 These and other similar Jewish-Australian organisations with strong ties to Israel have been active for many decades in countering what they see as examples of bias or misreporting of conflicts and tensions in the Middle East by Australian media organisations.
7.8 There are of course exceptions, such as the relatively recently-formed Jewish Council of Australia, which opposes the actions of the current Israeli government in Gaza and elsewhere and is much less inclined to criticise the ABC’s coverage of the Middle East. It is hard to estimate how representative the JCA is of Jewish-Australians as a whole.
7.9 Unlike most other Australian media organisations, the ABC has maintained for decades at least one seasoned reporter - and usually more than one - based in the Middle East. Those of our members who have in the past been ABC foreign correspondents based in Jerusalem, Beirut, Cyprus or Amman, or have been senior editors responsible for news and current affairs programs that deal from time to time with Middle Eastern affairs, are all familiar with the power and persistence of what is often termed (inaccurately, it could be argued) “the Jewish lobby” or (more accurately) “the pro-Israel lobby” in Australia.
7.10 To quote just one example among many, Peter Cave, who ended a long and distinguished career as the ABC’s Chief Foreign Correspondent, wrote to the authors of this submission:
From the first time I went into Israel in 1987 to cover the first Intifada until I retired in 2012 (in Israel, as it so happens) I have found myself under constant attack for bias and misreporting by sectors of the so-called Jewish Lobby…
7.11 ABC Alumni accepts that the ABC’s Board has a legal obligation under the ABC Act s8 (1)(c) “to ensure that the gathering and presentation by the Corporation of news and information is accurate and impartial according to the recognized standards of objective journalism”.
7.12 We accept that Jewish-Australian organisations, like any other Australian citizens, have every right to complain to the ABC if they believe it has failed in this obligation in particular instances.
7.13 But we submit that organisations like the ECAJ and AIJAC represent one side of a many-sided, highly-contested series of conflicts and histories. It is inevitable, and indeed appropriate in our submission, that the ABC’s view of what is impartial, accurate and objective reporting should frequently diverge from the view of avowedly pro-Israel organisations such as the ECAJ.
7.14 A recent example of the damage that can be done when the ABC is seen to bow to such pressure was the decision by the ABC’s Chief Content Officer to relieve Ms Antoinette Lattouf from her on-air duties as a temporary replacement presenter of ABC Radio Sydney’s Morning program on 20 December 2023.
7.15 The Federal Court found that Ms Lattouf had been unlawfully dismissed. ABC Alumni agrees with Justice Rangiah that much of the blame should be apportioned to a series of negligent mistakes and errors of judgment on the part of ABC management.[17]
7.16 But there is no doubt that one causative factor was, in the words of Justice Rangiah,“an orchestrated campaign by pro-Israel lobbyists to have Ms Lattouf taken off air” – a campaign that started before she began broadcasting on the Monday morning, and gathered intensity over the ensuing days, despite the fact that she did not deal in any way with the Gaza conflict on air.
7.17 The affair cost the ABC a great deal of money. Worse, it did enormous damage to the ABC’s reputation for independence, and to its staff’s confidence in the judgement of its own management and Board.
8. The ABC’s Editorial Standards
8.1 It is for these reasons that ABC Alumni is alarmed by the notion that someone of Ms Segal’s affiliations and beliefs should be given any kind of official, government-supported role “to encourage accurate, fair and responsible reporting and assist [media organisations] to meet their editorial standards and commitment to impartiality and balance and to avoid accepting false or distorted narratives.”
8.2 This is especially true with regard to the public broadcasters. The ABC’s editorial policies, backed by a series of extensive Guidance Notes for journalists and content-makers, are more detailed and prescriptive than those of any other media organisation in Australia.[18] The ABC applies the standards to all its content, whether broadcast, streamed or published on line.
8.3 The ABC is legally[19] and ethically committed to accuracy and impartiality in its news and information. Its journalists take that responsibility very seriously.
8.4 The ABC Board is also legally obliged to maintain the Corporation’s independence and integrity.[20] No outside body other than, to a limited degree, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), has any power to influence the ABC’s Editorial Policies.
8.5 The ABC Ombudsman, appointed directly by the ABC Board, not by the managing director or ABC management, is responsible for the department that handles complaints against the ABC and personally adjudicates complaints of a serious nature. She or he can take any concerns direct to the Board.[21]
8.6 Complainants who are not satisfied by the ABC’s response to complaints can appeal to the ACMA.
8.7 No other body, including the Department of Communications in the federal government and its Minister, has any recognised role in “monitoring” the ABC or SBS “to encourage accurate, fair and responsible reporting and assist them to meet their editorial standards”. If the Minister is dissatisfied with ABC content, he or she can complain, like any other citizen or representative body, to the ABC.
8.8 Granting a special monitoring role to the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism – especially in so far as the public broadcasters’ coverage of conflicts and tensions in the Middle East is concerned – would severely jeopardise the perception of their independence and impartiality, especially in the eyes of Australians of Palestinian or Arab ethnicity or Muslim beliefs.
9. The ABC and antisemitism
9.1 There is no ABC Editorial Policy or Guidance Note devoted specifically to antisemitism. There are, however, detailed Guidance Notes covering such topics as Racism, Cultural Diversity, the reporting of Terrorism and Terrorist Attacks, and Hate Speech.[22]
9.2 This is an excerpt from the current ABC Guidance Note on Identifying discriminatory content.
There are identifiable patterns that can help distinguish hate speech and prejudice from legitimate debate.
For instance, the point at which legitimate criticism of the state of Israel and the actions of some Israelis becomes antisemitism reveals itself when the target becomes ‘Jews’ rather than ‘Israel’.It cuts the other way too, when legitimate criticism of Hamas or other Palestinian groups becomes denigration of ‘Arabs’.
9.3 Of course, no organisation is faultless and the ABC’s editorial policies may on occasion be breached by individual journalists, editors or content-makers. When that happens there are avenues for complaint. But we submit that there is no evidence whatever that the ABC’s output, whether concerning domestic issues or overseas conflicts, has contributed to the growth of antisemitism in Australia.
9.4 Over and above its own journalism, the ABC has a duty to cover major debates within Australian society. Standard 4.2 of the ABC’s Editorial Policies requires content-makers to
Present a diversity of perspectives within a reasonable timeframe … so that no significant strand of thought or belief within the community is knowingly excluded or disproportionately represented.
9.5 There is a significant strand of thought within the Australian polity which believes that Israel’s actions since 7 October 2023 have exceeded any acceptable definition of self-defence. These critics are sometimes strident in their condemnation of the Netanyahu government and the IDF.
9.6 Ensuring that such legitimate criticism is given appropriate airing, without allowing it to veer into antisemitism, is not easy, but ABC Alumni submits that the ABC and SBS both do a reasonable job.
9.7 Too many of the ABC’s critics, especially those sympathetic to Israel, confuse opposition to Israel, and to Zionism, with antisemitism. We contend that maintaining that distinction is essential if freedom of speech is to be maintained in a multi-cultural and diverse polity.
9.8 And we submit that freedom of speech, within the bounds of the recently strengthened laws concerning racial hatred, is an essential contributor to, not an enemy of, social cohesion.
10. Conclusion
10.1 ABC Alumni urges the Commissioner not to make recommendations that accept or reinforce the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism’s proposal that she should be given any kind of authority to shape or influence the public broadcasters’ Editorial Policies, or to “monitor” their implementation.
10.2 The Special Envoy is free, or course, to make representations to the ABC and SBS, like any other Australian individual or representative body. To give her any more power than that would, in our submission, imperil the cherished editorial independence of our public broadcasters, and their reputation for impartiality.
Submitted by the Board of ABC Alumni Ltd
Chair: Dr Michael Ward
Secretary: Janet Clayton
Board members:
Quentin Dempster AM
Jonathan Holmes
Dr Gael Jennings AM
Sandra Levy AO
Peter Marks
Chrissie McIntyre
Email: [email protected]
Footnotes
[1] https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-parliament-house-canberra-42
[2] https://www.aseca.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-07/2025-aseca-plan.pdf
[3] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-10/the-plan-to-combat-antisemitism-in-australia/105519422
[4] https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/radionational-breakfast/radio-national-breakfast-full-episode-11th-july-2025/105521314 Relevant passage starts at 01.41.15 Our transcript
[5] https://www.abc.net.au/about/ombudsman/complaints/resolved/abc-news-gaza-hospital-explosion/103852858
[6] See for example https://www.meaa.org/mediaroom/stop-killing-journalists-australian-media-figures-take-a-stand-as-death-toll-continues-to-rise/
[7] For a treatment of contested claims see ABC News 25 Oct 2023 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-26/gaza-al-ahli-hospital-blast-new-assessments/103015066
[8] See for example: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-14/israel-strikes-gaza-hospitals-targeting-hamas-chief-sinwar/105289666
[9] This was the police estimate used by ABC News. Organisers claimed as many as 300,000 participants.
[10] The Gazan Ministry of Health’s estimates of known deaths from the Gazan conflict were dismissed as propaganda by Israeli authorities until 29 January 2026, when the IDF told a press conference that the figure of 70,000 was “largely accurate”. That figure does not include many thousands of unidentified bodies buried under the rubble in Gaza.
[11] Robert Manne, ‘Don’t Mention The War’, 1 January 2026, https://robertmanne.substack.com/p/dont-mention-the-war.
[12] https://www.ecaj.org.au/about/
[13] https://www.ecaj.org.au/about/our-policies/
[14] https://aijac.org.au/about-aijac/
[15] https://www.zfa.com.au/our-purpose/
[16] https://nswjbd.org.au/study-tours/
[17] For Federal Court judgment see https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2025/2025fca0669
For ABC Alumni’s position on the Lattouf matter see https://www.abcalumni.au/lessons_from_a_sorry_saga
[18] https://www.abc.net.au/edpols/policies
[19] ABC Act 1983 s8(1)(c)
[20] ABC Act 1983 s8(1)(b)
[21] https://www.abc.net.au/about/ombudsman
[22] ABC Guidance Note at https://www.abc.net.au/edpols/hate-speech-terrorism-and-mass-killings/13644814