Keeping power in check: The Age as a watchdog

In their feedback and correspondence, subscribers to The Age constantly make clear to me their desire for our journalists to hold society’s powerful people and institutions to account.

There is nothing new or innovative about the watchdog function of publications such as ours, indeed it is something people expect. But if you will allow me a small boast, I have to say I think we’re quite good at it.

The Age spent seven years successfully defending Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters’ reporting on the war crimes of Australia’s most decorated soldier, Ben Roberts-Smith.Credit: Sam Mooy

In recent weeks our reporting has revealed:

• The Victorian government is seeking to save $2.4 billion by delaying funding increases promised under the Gonski reforms, embedding the status of the so-called “Education State” as the nation’s poorest funder of public schools.
• An outlaw bikie gang has been linked to a spate of firebombings targeting construction businesses across the state, and building industry insiders are concerned that government and law enforcement are not doing enough to stop it.
• A dispute in the Victorian Liberal Party following a faux pas about Gina Rinehart has spilled over into a Fair Work matter.
• Victorians’ lives could be saved by mandating that defibrillators be registered on a public database.
• A state government payroll tax touted as a salve for our ailing mental health system is overdelivering financially, but the state hasn’t yet met a commitment for 170 new mental health beds.

Most of these stories seek to hold our elected officials accountable along with the people they appoint to public roles, but our watchdog role extends beyond government to power in places such as sporting codes, business, schools, hospitals, the courts, society and the media. Of course, watchdog journalism doesn’t cover everything we do, but it’s at the heart of our purpose.

And we understand that the privilege of being a journalist at a respected institution such as The Age comes with a level of accountability.

At an event this week a long-term reader, curious about the editorial process, asked me how we ensure that we perform our watchdog role responsibly.

In truth, I gave a verbose answer, listing many of the systems, policies and conventions that help guide our editorial decision-making to ensure we are meeting our commitments to our subscribers and society more broadly.

There is no secret sauce; it is a complex and sometimes messy process that no one would describe as flawless.

I could have responded more succinctly with the cliche that we strive to report “without fear or favour” and added that we insist on a level of rigour and accountability that seeks to protect the integrity of our coverage.

Chris Masters (left) and Nick McKenzie were subject to attacks on their credibility before Ben Roberts-Smith lost his defamation case.Credit: James Brickwood

Our systems are designed to maximise accuracy, include context and nuance and afford fairness to the people and organisations we write about. We usually get it right, but when we don’t, we correct and remedy our mistakes.

Though it is not something on which we would ever compromise, the cost of that “without fear or favour” mantra can be great, not only in a financial sense.

Those in power frequently seek to discredit our reporting or “spin” findings to lessen the impact on their reputation. Others, meanwhile, seek to use the legal system to rewrite the truth.

The Age spent seven years tied up in the federal court successfully defending Nick McKenzie and Chris Masters’ reporting on the war crimes of Australia’s most decorated soldier, Ben Roberts-Smith.

The full court of the Federal Court unanimously dismissed Roberts-Smith’s appeal this month, upholding findings that he was complicit in the murder of four unarmed prisoners while deployed in Afghanistan between 2009 and 2012. Tens of millions of dollars and countless hours was spent defending this courageous journalism.

Since the appeal result was handed down earlier this month, I have not had the chance to thank you, our subscribers, for your support throughout this saga. We are grateful for your financial contribution, obviously, but also for the reams of correspondence urging our editors and reporters to persevere and continue to keep watch on the country’s most powerful individuals and institutions, large and small.

I can assure you, we won’t stop.

Get a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up for our Opinion newsletter.