‘Breathtakingly stupid’: ABC roasted over massive Q&A fail

An Australian historian has blasted the ABC over its coverage of the Voice to parliament describing it as “breathtaking stupidity”.

An Australian historian has blasted the ABC over its coverage of the Voice to parliament during Monday night’s episode of Q&A describing the public broadcaster as being “deeply irresponsible”.

The panel featured assisted Indigenous Australians minister Malarndirri McCarthy, senator Jacinta Price, South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas, Greens Senator Jordon Steele-John and former secretary of the US Navy, Richard Spencer.

A question of breathtaking stupidity, cowardice and ignorance for a publicly funded broadcaster - it's an absolute disgrace that the ABC is flirting with disinformation of this kind. The High Court rules on constitutional matters. Full stop. https://t.co/VsWldmwwpx

— Frank Bongiorno (@fbongiornoanu) March 27, 2023

But it was a question put to panelists and the program’s social media audience that caused the biggest stir.

On Twitter, the program’s official account asked: “Should the High Court be able to rule on matters of the Voice to Parliament?”

It provoked the strong reaction from journalists and academics, including Professor of History at the Australian National University, Frank Bongiorno.

Prof Bongiorno described the question as an “absolute disgrace” and lambasted the public broadcaster for “flirting with disinformation”.

“A question of breathtaking stupidity, cowardice and ignorance for a publicly funded broadcaster,” he wrote on Twitter.

“It’s an absolute disgrace that the ABC is flirting with disinformation of this kind. The High Court rules on constitutional matters. Full stop.

He told news.com.au the public broadcaster was “deeply irresponsible” to ask it.

Some of the panellist from last night.

Q+A host Stan Grant.

“The High Court, as a matter of course, deliberates on constitutional matters, so of course it could at some point have to deliberate on the Voice should the referendum succeed,” he said.

“It is deeply irresponsible for the ABC to promote confusion in the public mind about an issue like this one. It is like asking: ‘Should the High Court deliberate on whether foreign nationals can sit in the Australian Parliament?’.”

“The ABC has a role in educating the public about how their system works, not in giving encouragement to confusion or even disinformation.”

Aunty Tracey asks Jacinta Price why she’s planning to vote “No” in the Voice to Parliament referendum #QandApic.twitter.com/RulNsd9Iq0

— QandA (@QandA) March 27, 2023

Prof Bongiorno said he fears the Voice could be derailed if the “mainstream media circulates absurdities like this one”.

“The chance of voters being completely bewildered by claim and counterclaim is very high,” he said.

The question also called out by The Guardian’s political reporter Josh Butler.

He wrote on Twitter: “‘Should the High Court be able to rule on the constitution’ is an odd one to put out to a viewer poll — considering that’s what the court, you know… does.”

Others on social media also lashed the question.

“Good to see Q&A’s social media team doesn’t: A) understand how the constitution works (and) B) understands the potential issues the voice could create when it comes to constitutional validity of acts of parliament/exec but which are largely dealt with by the proposed wording,” one user wrote on Twitter.

“This should never have been published. It promotes misinformation and controversy for no good reason. Shameful,” another user wrote.

[e-mail]