ABC executive Christopher Oliver-Taylor ‘under pressure’ from Ita Buttrose

Christopher Oliver-Taylor was under pressure to sack Antoinette Lattouf after Ita Buttrose made clear she was ‘deeply unhappy’ with action taken on the stand-in radio host, the Federal Court has heard.

Antoinette Lattouf arrives at the Federal Court. Picture: NewsWire / Jeremy Piper

The ABC executive who made the decision to sack Antoinette Lattouf was under a “great deal of pressure” after chair Ita Buttrose forwarded him a “big bunch” of complaints about her and managing director David Anderson made clear he was “really unhappy” about her being on air, the Federal Court has heard.

Then-chief content officer Christopher Oliver-Taylor, giving evidence in Lattouf’s unfair dismissal case against the ABC, told the court it was “unusual” for Ms Buttrose to email him directly with complaints from disgruntled listeners taking issue with Lattouf’s views on the Israel-Gaza war.

He said he was “very confused” when trying to balance the concerns of Ms Buttrose and Mr Anderson with advice from editorial director Simon Melkman that there was no good reason for Lattouf to be taken off-air.

Mr Oliver-Taylor made the decision to terminate the stand-in-presenter’s employment three days into her five-day contract in December 2023 after discovering she had shared an Instagram post from Human Rights Watch alongside the caption: “HRW reporting starvation as a tool of war”.

The Federal Court heard Mr Oliver-Taylor had received text messages from Mr Anderson saying the public broadcaster had an “Antoinette problem” because of her socials being filled with “anti-Semitic hatred”. Mr Oliver-Taylor said this was the first he had heard of Lattouf’s anti-Israel views.

Later, Ms Buttrose began forwarding Mr Oliver-Taylor various complaints made directly to the ABC from listeners concerned with her “partisan” views shared on social media of the conflict in the Middle East.

Meanwhile, Mr Oliver-Taylor had been given advice from Mr Melkman that there was “no basis” for the ABC to remove Lattouf from her on-air position.

Lattouf’s barrister, Oshie Fagir, suggested Mr Oliver-Taylor was under a “great deal of pressure” and stuck “between a rock and a hard place” on how to handle the situation.

“I was getting very confused and concerned as to what we should do,” Mr Oliver-Taylor said.

ABC chief content officer Christopher Oliver-Taylor arrives at Federal Court. Picture: NewsWire / Jeremy Piper

The court was read an email Mr Oliver-Taylor to Ms Buttrose in which he apologised for the unfolding situation.

In response, Ms Buttrose wrote back: “Goes with the job, Chris. Think we’ll keep getting these complaints until Antoinette leaves”.

“I agree, we have been left in an untenable position on how to resolve and are working to find the best solution to this predicament,” Mr Oliver-Taylor replied to Ms Buttrose. “Again I apologise to you, David and the board for putting you in this position.”

Mr Fagir suggested Ms Buttrose was “very unhappy” with the way he was handling the situation. Mr Oliver-Taylor disagreed, but said he thought it was “unusual” that he was named as the person responsible for the ongoing situation.

Mr Fagir suggested Mr Oliver-Taylor was put in a “deeply unfair position” by Ms Buttrose and Mr Anderson. Mr Oliver-Taylor said there was “pressure from above”.

Earlier, Mr Oliver-Taylor conceded it was “highly atypical” for senior ABC staff to have scrutinised Lattouf’s conduct as a casual employee, but stopped short of admitting the ABC’s treatment of Lattouf was “abnormal”.

In its defence, the ABC claims Lattouf was dismissed for making the post despite being given a direction from her line manager, Elizabeth Green, to avoid sharing anything relating to the war while engaged with ABC Radio Sydney.

Lattouf claims she and Ms Green agreed she was allowed to post “factual information from reputable sources like Amnesty International”.

Asked by Lattouf’s barrister, Oshie Fagir, whether it was “highly atypical for you as chief content officer to be scrutinising the conduct of a casual employee engaged to work for five days at Radio Sydney”, Mr Oliver-Taylor responded: “That is correct”.

But when Mr Fagir suggested the way the ABC dealt with Lattouf in that week was “highly abnormal” Mr Oliver-Taylor disagreed.

The court was read an email sent by Mr Oliver-Taylor to ABC head of capital city networks Steve Ahern and head of audio Ben Latimer two days in to Lattouf’s contract, which said the decision “to place Antoinette Lattouf on air as a guest presenter looks ill-informed”.

“If background checks had been completed to a sufficient degree at least two issues would have come to light,” he wrote. Mr Fagir identified the two issues as Lattouf’s stance on the Israel-Gaza war, and the fact she had signed a petition calling for balanced reporting on the ongoing crisis.

Mr Oliver-Taylor said he had become concerned there could be a “perception of bias” if Lattouf remained on the air.

“I understood that there was a view Ms Lattouf held which … she had published,” he said. “It was very clear she had published various things in the previous weeks leading up to her engagement with he ABC and then during her engagement with the ABC which meant there was a perception of bias for ABC Radio.”

Despite this, he denied knowing about Lattouf’s view on the Israel-Gaza war at the time of dismissing her.

During the hearing on Wednesday, Mr Anderson told the court that Mr Oliver-Taylor was the executive who had made the decision to sack Lattouf.

“If Mr Oliver-Taylor had his time over again, he might have sought additional advice from other people before he made his decision … there was potentially a step missing, with regard to this issue, but it might have had the same ending,” Mr Anderson told the court.

Pushed further, the ABC boss said: “Hindsight is a wonderful thing. You would like to have seen that there was certainly a discussion with Ms Lattouf to find out the motivation behind what I believed at the time was disobeying a direction, and then tried to ascertain what the resulting risk was.”

The hearing continues.