NepalIsrael.com auto goggle feed
Key events
Hearing has adjourned
The hearing has adjourned until 2.15pm after a long session with no break. David Anderson, the outgoing managing director, will return after lunch to finish his evidence.
It’s been an intense and action-packed morning of evidence, which offered a behind-the-scenes look at the inner workings of the national broadcaster.
Among the revelations was that Anderson believed Lattouf’s appointment was “a mistake” because of her partisan view on Israel-Gaza war.
After looking at her social media, Anderson said he had “concerns that we had put someone with a publicly stated partisan position on a current contentious issue [on air] … and they’re hosting talkback radio with the community”.
It wasn’t Lattouf’s particular political view which concerned him, but that she advocated for “one perspective in that war, he said.
We will return after the lunch break.
Lattouf process was ‘completely abnormal – from start to finish’, Anderson says
Anderson again concedes the usual process was not followed in Lattouf’s case and he left it up to Oliver-Taylor to follow the ABC’s employment guidelines.
He tells the court that the “whole exercise is completely abnormal – from start to finish”.
Anderson says he did not follow up with Oliver-Taylor about whether he had engaged human resources before terminating Lattouf. He says the executive was very senior and had delegated authority.
“And frankly, that decision [to take her off air] was a surprise to me,” Anderson says:
I didn’t expect that at all. What was my understanding that Ms Lattouf was on air to the end of the week.
Anderson calls Lattouf’s appointment ‘a mistake’ because of her partisan view on Israel-Gaza war
Anderson tells the court Lattouf should never have been appointed as a casual radio host on the Sydney Mornings radio program because of a publicly stated partisan position.
Yes, I think her appointment to being host of mornings was a mistake.
Fagir says: “She ought not have been a host of mornings because of the opinions which you knew her to hold in relation to Israel?”
Anderson says it wasn’t Lattouf’s particular political view which concerned him, but that she advocated for “one perspective in that war” and it was only months out from Hamas’s surprise attack on Israel on 7 October 2023.
I still had concerns that we had put someone with a publicly stated partisan position on a current contentious issue.
Earlier, Anderson said after looking at her social media, he had “concerns that we had put someone with a publicly stated partisan position on a current contentious issue [on air] … and they’re hosting talkback radio with the community”.
Anderson’s Google search left him ‘deeply concerned’ about Lattouf and Radio Sydney
Fagir has taken Anderson to evidence about the Lawyers for Israel WhatsApp group which was bombarding the ABC with complaints about Lattouf.
Anderson says he knew it was a coordinated campaign “because the wording was exactly the same in every email”.
“It was top and tailed slightly differently, but there was similar words that were used and it just looked like copy and paste of material that was coming through,” he says.
Anderson agrees that he did a Google search of Lattouf on the evening of her first day on air.
He says he looked at her social media feed and found an article she had written for Crikey about an anti-Israel protest at the Opera House.
“I was deeply concerned about what I saw,” he says.
Anderson agrees that he had noted that day that some of her posts contained “antisemitic hatred”.
Fagir:
You were abhorred by what you had seen?
Anderson:
I was concerned that that was going to end up on Radio Sydney.
Anderson remembers he believed Lattouf’s criticisms challenged the existence of Israel, “which I do believe to be antisemitic”.
“I remember whether it was Ms Lattouf or whether it was other people posting beyond Ms Lattouf or her replies, that, that, to me, added up to antisemitism that was sitting on her social feeds.”
ABC did not follow usual process when Lattouf was taken off-air, Anderson tells court
Anderson’s cross-examination by Fagir continues and is still zeroing in on the ABC’s numerous policies and the codes of conduct for content makers.
The ABC’s enterprise agreement requires that the employee be given a chance to explain any allegations, and an investigation is started.
“That investigation is usually done by, or can be done by, somebody in the employee relations team and people and culture,” Anderson says.
Fagir asks if the ABC followed the usual process in Lattouf’s case:
Do you know what process, if any, was followed? Was the process you’ve just described followed in relation to Ms Lattouf?
Anderson replies:
I don’t believe so.
Fagir then responds: “Now, could you just tell us, is that a process that you understand to be required by the enterprise agreement? Or where, what is the source of the process or the requirement to follow the process that we’ve been assessing?”
Anderson agrees that the process defined by the enterprise agreement should be followed.
When Lattouf’s post about Gaza triggered concern Anderson agreed “it warranted assessment” but he does not know “in detail” if that happened.
The decision to take Lattouf off-air and was made by Oliver-Taylor, who is scheduled to give evidence next, and communicated to Anderson, the court has previously heard.
Anderson denies ABC applies code of conduct ‘utterly arbitrarily’
Fagir is taking Anderson back over yesterday’s evidence about the ABC’s treatment of several high-profile presenters who had made potentially contentious statements.
They include former Media Watch host Paul Barry, who tweeted “Israel is killing journalists again” and was not subject to any sanctions; the global affairs editor, John Lyons, the Q+A host, Patricia Karvelas, and the ABC chair, Kim Williams.
Anderson: “I think what we look at is, as I said before, the staff code of conduct and the elements that sit within it. Does it undermine the ABC? Does it undermine the person’s effectiveness at work?”
Anderson then denies Fagir’s assertion that the code of conduct is applied “utterly arbitrarily”.
“No, I wouldn’t categorise it as arbitrary,” he says.
Fagir then responds:
It effectively permits you or any other ABC decision-maker to discriminate in your sanctions based on your own view of things like the truthfulness of the statement.
Anderson replies:
I think what we do is take on board analysis and judgment as to whether or not it requires a sanction.
ABC journalist being taken off-air and moved on ‘a very serious step’, court hears
David Anderson has started giving his evidence and has agreed with Fagir that for a journalist an on-air role at the ABC is highly sought after.
Fagir: “You’d agree that an opportunity to present on the ABC is a very valuable one?”
Anderson: “Yes.”
Fagir then asks: “Would you suggest that being taken off-air, moved on from an ABC gig, is anything other than a very serious step from the employee’s point of view?”
And Anderson responds: “I would agree it’s not something to be done lightly.”
Anderson told court about regrets and flagged ‘step missing’ in Lattouf process
Yesterday we heard from Anderson that he has some regrets over the way the Lattouf matter was handled.
Under cross-examination by Lattouf’s barrister, Oshie Fagir, he said there was a “step missing” and Lattouf should have been given a chance to explain herself:
I think there’s a step in the middle, of a discussion with Ms Lattouf, to ensure that they’ve sought the right advice from employee relations and people and culture as part of that decision.
Anderson, who hired Oliver-Taylor, said the executive was a competent manager but if he had his time over he may have sought additional advice from human resources.
“Hindsight is a wonderful thing,” Anderson said, adding that it would have been useful to talk to Lattouf to find out what the motivation behind her social media post was.
It was an interesting admission and we are keen to hear later today when Oliver-Taylor enters the witness box if he has any regrets.
Anderson also revealed he agreed with the statement “Australia is a racist country” and had no problem with the ABC political editor, Laura Tingle, making the statement at a writers’ festival. The Guardian reported on that story last year.
Fagir challenged Anderson on why Lattouf was taken off air when Tingle and other ABC personalities had been allowed to make potentially contentious or impartial statements.
Anderson said he looked at it on a case-by-case basis.
You can read our report from Wednesday here:
Welcome
Hi, I’m Amanda Meade, media correspondent, and I’ll be watching day four of the Antoinette Lattouf v ABC unlawful termination claim today.
We will bring you all the evidence as it unfolds from 10.45am though to 4.30pm.
Witnesses today include two ABC chiefs: David Anderson, the managing director who is back to complete his cross-examination, and Chris Oliver-Taylor, the outgoing ABC content chief.
The post”Antoinette Lattouf hearing day four: ABC did not follow usual process when journalist taken off-air, court hears – live | Australian Broadcasting Corporation” is auto generated by Nepalisrael.com’s Auto feed for the information purpose. [/gpt3]
