Alberici branded a Yes vote bully

Emma Alberici has come under fire over her treatment of a journalist who queried the tactics of SSM supporters.

Emma Alberici claimed Caroline Marcus said she would vote no on same-sex marriage to ‘prove a point’.

ABC presenter Emma Alberici has denied she “bullied” a rival presenter on social media over the same-sex marriage debate, while the ABC declined to determine whether the Lateline host had breached an editorial directive to give all sides in the debate respect and a “fair hearing”.

Sky News reporter Caroline Marcus made the bullying ­accusation after writing a column indicating people could switch from a Yes vote to a No vote ­because of the behaviour of left-wing activists.

Marcus, who writes for News Corp, cited former High Court judge Michael Kirby and Alberici as the “worst offenders” in the “Yes brigade”.

Alberici tweeted in response: “Says she’ll vote NO to prove a point WTF? Ignores own colleagues at @SkyNews who call those against #SSM bigots ping @vanOnselenP”

Says she'll vote NO to prove a point WTF? Ignores own colleagues at @SkyNews who call those against #SSM bigots ping @vanOnselenP 👏🏻 👌🏻 https://t.co/lIwlJBd9Hg

— Emma Alberici (@albericie) August 14, 2017

As the row embroiled News Corp columnists, Sky News presenters and even a former prime minister, the ABC said: “Personal social media posts by staff are not official ABC content and are not covered by the ABC’s editorial policies.”

Alberici’s account is not an ­official ABC account, but ­it does acknowledge her ABC role.

“As with most organisations, the ABC’s social media policy attempts to strike the right balance between the rights of individuals and citizens and their work for the ABC,” the broadcaster said.

After Alberici’s tweet, both Marcus and News Corp colleague Miranda Devine accused her of bullying. The ABC presenter ­responded: “Asking a question about the vulnerability of young gay & lesbian Australians has seen me ­labelled an activist bully. Seriously.”

Former prime minister Tony Abbott soon weighed in: “I see the usual suspects are having a go at @carolinemarcus. Good on her for resisting bullies.”

Classic example of bullying here. Shame on you @albericie https://t.co/bVLZm01Xbl

— Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) August 15, 2017

#theirABC personalities flout charter...campaign on political issues...and those who disagree are "bigots" https://t.co/lCEQowbEUw

— Chris Kenny (@chriskkenny) August 15, 2017

I see the usual suspects are having a go at @carolinemarcus. Good on her for resisting bullies. https://t.co/Y7lGr8WAzh

— Tony Abbott (@TonyAbbottMHR) August 15, 2017

This prompted a response from one of Marcus’s colleague at Sky News, presenter Peter van Onselen, who interjected that The Australian had resisted bullies during Mr Abbott’s time as prime minister when his office had tried to get him sacked from the paper for his opinion columns.

On Sky News, van Onselen questioned Marcus about her column and also tweeted: “So you’d vote against your conscience re SSM to deny rights to loving couples just to spite pro SSM activists? Seriously? Wow ...”

.@mirandadevine I agree with you @carolinemarcus is a bully

— Emma Alberici (@albericie) August 15, 2017

Who have I bullied Emma? That's a disgusting accusation to make. https://t.co/VtyKpUjfoE

— Caroline Marcus (@carolinemarcus) August 15, 2017

Well done @carolinemarcus Not easy being a mainstream voice in a sea of virtue signalling...

— Chris Kenny (@chriskkenny) August 15, 2017

One ABC supporter of Alberici said she was not an activist but a journalist. “Marcus called her an activist for having the temerity to ask a question about vulnerable youth, Devine called her a bully for standing up for herself. It’s only free speech when it’s from News Corp,” the supporter said.

Last week, the ABC’s policy manager emailed staff to remind them to restrain themselves on social media. Mark Maley wrote: “Please remember that approximately 40 per cent of the popul­ation opposes the change and more importantly that the ABC does not have a position on the issue. It is very important that we are impartial and all perspectives are given a fair hearing and treated with respect.”