The ABC of institutional bias: The questions Sally Scales wasn't asked

ABC presenter Patricia Karvelas at ABC studios in Southbank. Picture: Aaron Francis/The Australian

If further proof were needed, the ABC has again shown itself incapable of lifting beyond the superficial biases that might be clickbait for progressive ideologues but are against its charter and a turn-off for a majority of those who pay its bills.

The incurious approach of Media Watch to the possibility the Covid-19 virus leaked from a Wuhan laboratory amply demonstrates how political prejudice can drive the ABC’s groupthink decision-making.

Two items on Radio National’s Breakfast program on Wednesday morning confirm the lack of rigour and consequently the poor service it provides to a dwindling band of listeners.

Indigenous artist Sally Scales, who is an executive board member of the APY Art Centre Collective and on the National Gallery of Australia council, was given free rein to attack a government probe into claims of white hands on Indigenous art and defend the white studio staff who allegedly painted on the canvas of another APY artist, Yaritji Young.

Given Scales’s role as the NGA’s First Nations Advisory Group chairwoman, ABC host Patricia Karvelas failed to ask the questions that mattered.

Sally Scales. Picture: Roy VanDerVegt

Why had the APYACC been expelled from the Indigenous Art Code? Why had the four peak bodies representing every Indigenous arts centre in the Northern Territory, South Australia and Western Australia called on APYACC general manager Skye O’Meara to resign? What about claims of bullying and bribes involving artists who had spoken out publicly? What did she know about claims of fraudulent documents signed in grant applications? What about claims of coercive control?

Instead, ABC listeners were left with Scales’s dismissal that claims against the APYACC were a case of tall poppy syndrome.

An equally soft touch was given to former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, who says he does not need to watch a new channel on Sky News dedicated to the voice referendum to declare it is up to no good.

Mr Turnbull did admit he was now joint chair with former ACTU leader Sharan Burrow to a lobby group started by Kevin Rudd calling for a royal commission into the Murdoch media. But Mr Turnbull’s claims about unfair coverage of the referendum are hypocritical and do not stand up to scrutiny.

A Sky News documentary on the voice proposal is an example of the sort of good journalism that is badly lacking on the ABC.

Mr Turnbull has been an outspoken critic of the voice, something Karvelas did not see fit to share with listeners. In a conversation with Ngaire Woods at the Blavatnik School at the University of Oxford in 2019, Mr Turnbull said he rejected a voice proposal on the basis that every citizen was equal.

“I believe that all of our national institutions should be open to every Australian,” he said. “I don’t agree with a national elected body that would become in effect a third chamber of parliament, being available only to Aboriginal Australians.”

He said not only was the voice not a good idea, it “had absolutely zero prospect of being passed in a constitutional referendum”. He said he believed “every Australian citizen has exactly the same rights whether they are a descendant from the first inhabitants of Australia and in a sense their ancestry goes back 60,000 years, a baby just been born, or a refugee who has just been in Australia for a couple of years”.

We support Mr Turnbull’s right to state his view and change his mind. Just as we report the views of Yes campaigners who believe constitutional change is vital for reconciliation. A one-sided argument is what too often passes for journalism on the ABC. It is the road to censorious interference and must be called out.