ABC bosses ‘jump the shark’ in self-defence over Stan Grant’s accusation

ABC Q+A host Stan Grant on his final show on Monday before taking indefinite leave. Picture: ABC

Talk about jumping the shark. Stan Grant accuses ABC management of providing him with inadequate support in the wake of vile social media attacks concerning his role in the public broadcaster’s coverage of the King’s coronation and the head of news at the ABC lashes out at News Corp. That’s obfuscation 101.

Never mind that the core criticism from Grant was squarely directed at the ABC’s management team. To the extent that Grant felt set upon by commentators – some of whom work for News Corp, others do not by the way – is a side issue. It is also how the rough and tumble of offering controversial commentary works. Believe me, I know.

Polemicists with a platform – right across the media – launch scathing criticisms all the time. It’s false equivalence to compare such commentary to vile social media attacks. It happens at the ABC too, which was neatly unpicked as a problem for the public broadcaster by Stuart Littlemore and David Salter.

To the best of my knowledge nothing directed Grant’s way by the mainstream media has been referred to the Press Council or the Australian Communications and Media Authority. Much less been upheld as a fair complaint. Remembering that Grant’s criticisms were primarily directed at vile social media abuse as well as management failures within the organisation he works for.

ABC managing director David Anderson during the environment and communications Senate Estimates hearing at Parliament House this week. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Just imagine the reaction within the ABC if a News Corp journalist let fly at their employer for failing a duty of care to them and management’s reaction was to come out and blame it all on the ABC. What a joke.

Let’s not forget, ABC management thought it was a good idea to include Grant on a panel unpicking the role of the monarchy during the coronation coverage. Edgy at best, deliberately aimed at provoking anger at worst. Stupid either way.

It happened because Grant felt excluded for weeks’ worth of coverage of Queen Elizabeth’s death. An over-correction by management that caused a social media and viewer complaint backlash which included vile attacks within social media, a sadly all too common occurrence. When that happened, no one within the ABC bothered to support Grant, having invited him to participate in the first place. He decided to call that out.

Fast forward to today and ABC management stands by its decision to include scathing criticism of the monarchy in its coverage. Despite the backlash, despite the record number of viewer complaints. Despite the adverse impact doing so has had on Grant. It offers a hollow apology to him, and it crab-walks away from some of its criticisms of News Corp when appearing at Senate Estimates this week, noting journalists from other platforms also weighed in. Indeed.

Muddying the waters is a common strategy in politics. That’s exactly what ABC management attempted to do on this matter. The core of Grant’s criticism is that there is systemic racism at the ABC. That’s got less than nothing to do with News Corp.

Peter van Onselen is a professor of politics and public policy at the University of Western Australia and Griffith University.