July 9, 2025 • 16 mins
When journalist Antoinette Lattouf picked up a casual contract with ABC Radio Sydney, she didn’t expect it to end in court. But after she reshared a Human Rights Watch post about Gaza, the ABC pulled her off-air on day three and ended her employment.
Last month the Federal Court ruled that decision unlawful, finding senior executives acted after “an orchestrated campaign by pro-Israel lobbyists to have Ms Lattouf taken off air”, and ordered the ABC to pay her $70,000 in compensation.
The verdict is already forcing change: the ABC has pledged to overhaul its social-media rules, and questions have been raised about how journalists can report on Gaza without lobbying pressure.
Today, co-founder of Ette Media and plaintiff in the case, Antoinette Lattouf, on why she fought and what her win means for the future of journalism in Australia.
If you enjoy 7am, the best way you can support us is by making a contribution at 7ampodcast.com.au/support.
Socials: Stay in touch with us on Instagram
Guest: Journalist and co-founder of Ette Media, Antoinette Lattouf
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Anette, Welcome to Maam. First of all, how are you going? Oh?
Speaker 2 (00:04):
That is such a big question.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
When journalist Antonette ler Toofe was fired from her casual
job at ABC Local Radio purportedly for sharing a Human
Rights Watch post, she could have just let it go
and moved on, but instead she chose to fight, and
her landmark win against the ABC has implications not just
for the rights of casual workers, but for how all
(00:29):
journalists in Australia report on GAZA.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I am relieved, I'm exhausted, I'm a bit shelf shocked.
I guess I knew that this was significant, significant for
a bunch of reasons, but I didn't quite anticipate just
kind of the amount of shock waves and conversations that
it would inspire around the country but also around the world.
(00:53):
And a little bit exposed.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Her case laid bare the efforts of lobby groups and
how those who should be upholding independence and impartiality failed,
with the judge finding senior ABC managers had panicked after
an orchestrated campaign by pro Israel lobbyists to have Miss
Latouff taken off air. I'm Ruby Jones and you're listening
(01:17):
to seven Am Today, co founder of at Media and
applicant in the legal case against the ABC and Network
two on why she fought at the future of journalism
in Australia. It's Thursday, July tenth, an Tonette. I wondered
(01:48):
if you could perhaps just take me back to where
all of this began, the day that you were fired
from the ABC. What happened?
Speaker 2 (01:57):
So I was contracted a short stint before Christmas to
do ABC Sydney local radio. So this is outside of
the remit of news and current affairs. I had been
a freelance journalist for a few years, so it wasn't
uncommon for me to be called in to go and
do local radio. And so it was day three in
(02:17):
which I was called into a room with my managers,
three of them that essentially fired on the spot, and
told to get my bags and leave. I was told
at the time it was for a Human Rights Watch post,
but I had also been made to wear a couple
of days prior that. As soon as I had walked
in it to the ABC, there was an email campaign,
lots and lots of complaints to the ABC board and
(02:40):
management about ever hiring me.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
The paper ob tenned dozens of leaked messages from a
WhatsApp group called Lawyers for Israel, whose members route to
ABC calling for Latouf to be sacked and threatening legal
action if she wasn't.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
And it was subsequently established by a leak from two
WhatsApp groups, but the one that's referred to most as
Lawyers for Israel. And these were lawyers and barristers and
heads of organizations or orchestrating to put pressure on the
ABC to fire me because they didn't like my views
on Gaza.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
Antoinette Latoufe was sacked this afternoon, as she should have
been for her anti Israel social media posts. Here's one
of those posts.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
Have a listen, Israelis get killed, Palestinians just die. Language matters,
Israelis are always killed. You can also use the word slaughtered,
barbarica tas victims and terrorism when describing their tragic debts
for Palestinians. Given the body can't exceeds ten thousand, best
to keep it ambiguous.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
How the hell did she ever think she was going
to keep a job at the ABC by doing that.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
I guess some people might think, oh, this has been
a big deal, and this has been a lot of
coverage and a lot of taxpayer dollars and legal fees
and whatnot over what is a five day contract, And
you know, to that, I would say it was never
about five days. More about what my treatment said about
the ABC's independence and also the implications for journalism more broadly,
(04:11):
if the ABC, which is our best of the best,
can't withstand pressure from external lobby groups at a time
when we're witnessing an unfolding genocide.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
And as you said, you've worked at the ABC many times.
You've been a journalist for a long time, for more
than fifteen years, and as part of that you've covered
court cases, and so you would know, as many journalists
would know, that in taking legal action against the ABC,
you're doing something that I think has the potential to
(04:42):
publicly define you, at least to some people. So when
you were weighing up whether to take this action, how
did you decide that doing this would be worth the fight?
Speaker 2 (04:52):
That's a really good question, because you are right as
a journalist and you cover court proceedings or you cover
defamation or whatever it is, you know it's a very
taxing and sometimes unduly unfair process, particularly on a woman
or someone from a minority in the way that they're
treated or represented. I think what I decided to do
(05:12):
was I knew that I would have to take hits.
I would have to take hits from tabloid press, I
would have to take huge financial hits because the phone
stopped bringing, the work stopped coming in as a freelancer.
But I guess I was driven because I knew that
this gonna sound so cheesy, but honestly, it's how I
was feeling that this is something that was far more
(05:32):
significant than just myself. That this was for the integrity
of our taxpayer funded public broadcaster. This was because I
had a position to do something to hold somebody accountable
when people feel really helpless with witnessing the human rights
atrocities daily ongoing in Gaza, and that anything that I suffered,
(05:55):
I'd be able to cop because the greater benefit and
the public benefit would be And I know that makes
me sound like I want to be some mother Theresa,
but like, if this was just an individual workplace grievance,
Like if it was just me and a manager and
we didn't get along and they were a bit rude
and someone bullied me, I probably would not have litigated.
But given the context, and given the time in which
we're in, I just felt it was more significant than
(06:17):
myself and I.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
Want to go through the trial blow for blow. We
all watched it play out. There was an incredible scrutiny
on your case. But I think one of the big
questions that I have for you is that after sitting
there and seeing all of those emails and messages that
were sent between people at the very top of the ABC,
what do you think now about the way that the
(06:39):
public broadcaster.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
Operates based on the actions and the words and the
testimonies of that board. I mean absolutely appalling, not just
in its treatment of me, in the descriptions of.
Speaker 5 (06:51):
Me asked about latouf Ida, Buttro's told the court in
relation to the Israel Garza conflict she was an.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Activist wishing COVID it on me.
Speaker 5 (07:01):
In an email, the ABC chair asked whether the two
had been replaced, suggesting she could get COVID or a
stomach upset.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
Referring to me as the Antoinette issue. We have an
Antoinette issue, like appalling, but just in terms of governance
of a board, like a real lack of integrity, lack
of leadership. They had eighteen months ample opportunity, and instead
of fixing it, the doubling and tripling down has done
irreparable damage to those particular individuals and their legacies, but
(07:31):
also to the organization writ large.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
After the break, my journalists are leading user rooms to
go independent.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
Today, the court has found that punishing someone for sharing
facts about these war crimes is also illegal. I was
punished my political opinion. I won't be taking any questions.
I'll have more to say in due time.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
And the federal court found that the ABC contravened the
fair work at by terminating your employment for reasons, including
that you held a political opinion opposing the Israeli military
campaign in Gaza. So when that judgment came down, what
was that like for you in court?
Speaker 2 (08:26):
I mean, it was vindicating. I always knew that that's
why I was treated the way I was treated. I
always knew that I had done absolutely nothing wrong, that
sharing the Human Rights Watch post wasn't a breach of
a management directive, and so I didn't feel this great
relief as I like, ah, you know, it was more
just like I felt the next vindication, but sadness. Sadness
(08:47):
that millions of dollars were spent dragging me through the mud,
and I think always assuming that I would just back
off and that they would get away with it.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
And none of the seeing A management who were involved
in your case are at the ABC anymore at about
true system there David Anderson, Grisoloda Taylor, but the current chair,
Kim Williams, he spoke in the Press Club. He said
that you were not sacked.
Speaker 6 (09:14):
Miss Lettoof was not dismissed. Miss Latoof was on our five.
Miss Latouff had a five day contract and under that
contract the contract was brought to a close at the
end of the third day.
Speaker 1 (09:29):
What does that say to you about the way that
the people who are currently at the ABC are thinking
about what happened and where the organization sits now.
Speaker 4 (09:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
So Kim Williams obviously came in after all of this,
and there was a lot of hope on outside that
he would come in and fix it up. He had
this kind of pr opportunity to go, this is a
new leadership, this is a new year. We're going to
do things differently. So when he stood at the National
Press Club and reiterated that I wasn't sacked despite the
Fairwork Commission finding that I was sacked. We were like, oh,
(09:59):
and then he was like and unlike Miss Latooth.
Speaker 6 (10:01):
We have been impeccably silent about the matter, unlike Miss
Latoof and her representatives who seem to have been devoted
to sharing on a regular basis with the media.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
And so then try to kind of like categorize me
as like why is she still talking? Like why is
she complaining? And so hearing kind of that derision in
his voice and him taking that stand really signaled to me, well,
the ABC hasn't learnt anything, it's not sorry about anything,
and it's not being held accountable.
Speaker 1 (10:31):
And to speak more broadly, across the Australian media landscape,
how common do you think it is for journalists to
have their reporting and their social media surveiled scrutinized when
it comes to the war at Gaza? What kind of
stories have you heard from people in the last two years?
Speaker 2 (10:49):
Oh? Yeah, across the board. And it's not only in
the media, obviously, it's not only at the ABC. It's
certainly not only in the media. It's across all sectors.
There's a level of surveillance and in pinging on freedom
of political opinion and freedom to assemble and freedom of speech,
even though I know that that's not a constitutionally you know,
enshrined right. Unlike the United States, we have seen a
(11:13):
stifling of an ability to voice, discuss, despair, concern about
what we're witnessing, and have witnessed live streams on our
phone in four K for the past two years. We've
seen you overreach and meddling in creative institutes, Academics bullied
out of jobs or stood down, doctors investigated by opera
(11:33):
after bogus claims. You know, doctors who say, you know,
we believe doctors and aid workers and healthcare workers shouldn't
be killed. But yes, I've heard currentless stories across the
industry of people either leaving because they can't bear it,
being pushed out, or just feeling really despondent about the
future of the media and their role in it. Because
we're meant to give a voice to the voiceless, We're
(11:56):
meant to speak truth to power. Except it seems as
though we can do this on like all topics, except this.
There's a big asterisk here. And yeah, and I guess
that's part of why Janfran and I have started an
independent media company we saw many of our friends and
colleagues just leave in despair, and we thought, well, no,
we don't want to We don't want to go because
(12:16):
you know, then, I guess those people in those WhatsApp
groups get what they want. They get us silenced and
sacked and unemployed. And so we are seeing a few
people trying to start independent offshoots.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Speaking of the WhatsApp groups, You've spoken about the role
of lobbyists several times, and I just wonder over the
course of the last couple of years, what you have taken,
what you've learned about how lobbying operates in practice.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
Well, like, lobbyists can lobby, it's what they do right,
And there are lobbyists of all stripes. There are lobbyists
across industries, across religious groups, across business groups, across government.
Opposition like ABC has always been lobbied. It's not something
that the pro Israel camp created. It's just when the
lobbyists are the loudest and only voice heard that I
(13:04):
think we have a real problem. And also when it
trickles down to audiences where they're like, we can see
that influence the way in which stories are framed and
who we humanize, and who we go to as an
authority and whose lives we deem more important, and the
adjectives we use to describe the loss of one life
as opposed to the loss of twenty thousand other lives.
(13:25):
I think audiences are rightly skeptical and if the ABC
wants to remain relevant and trusted as the most trusted
news source in the world, it needs to show that
it can withstand lobbying of any form.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
And I just had one final question. There's been a
lot of commentary around what makes a person a journalist
or an activist, and I wonder if you have thoughts
on who decides where that line is and what it's
based on.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
Absolutely, I have so many thoughts on that. It's so
funny because when the Murdoch Press want to do something
like they'll call it a campaign. So they're like, we
have a campaign to get work from home people, employees
back to the office, back to the CBD because CBD
cafes are struggling, And they're like, oh, that's cute. You
call that a campaign. Is that activism journalism? There are
(14:11):
certain topics in which we accept the journalists are allowed
to have an opinion on now we accept that climate
changing systs. You know, for a long time, sections of
the press denied it. And so if a journalist has
views critical of polluters, that's not considered activism journalism. And
so I see that that framing usually reserved for those
(14:32):
who have the least access to power. And so for me,
as a woman, and as a woman of an Arab background,
it's a way to discredit me, calling me an activist journalist,
irrespective of my years and years of experience across many
outlets and all these awards, and I've even started a
media not for profit and I've done all of these
things because I dare to have a political opinion rooted
in facts. Oh well, we can't trust her because she's
(14:54):
an activist journalist, and it's just not applied as liberally
to other journal So I think it's a convenient label
that tries to discredit somebody who either has a different
opinion or is getting too close to challenging power that
wants to remain unchallenged. That's my view.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
And Tonette, thank you for your time.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Thank you, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
You can hear more of Anette Latoof's work on the podcast.
We used to be journos from ET Media. We asked
Kim Williams to speak with us for this episode, but
he declined. In a public statement, current ABC Managing director
Hugh Marx said, we regret how the decision to remove
Miss Latoof from air was handled and the distress occasioned her.
(15:40):
We extend our sincere apologies to Miss Latouf and wish
her well in her future endeavors. Also in the news today,
the Ambonezi government says it's urgently seeking clarity after US
President Donald Trump warned countries can expect two hundred percent
(16:01):
tariffs on all pharmaceutical imports. In twenty twenty four, Australia
exported roughly two point one billion dollars of medicinal and
pharmaceutical products to the United States, and Treasurer Jim Chalmers
says he's seeking more detail on Trump's announcement. And Victoria's
Do Anti Hate Task Force has met for the first
time following a series of incidents in Melbourne, including the
(16:24):
fire bombing of the East Melbourne Synagogue. Premier Decenter Alan
says the group has heard from the Chief Commissioner of
Victoria Police, who says the force is ready to act
and respond to the incidents in a strong manner. I'm
Ruby Jones. This is seven am. Thanks for listening.
Anette, Welcome to Maam. First of all, how are you going? Oh?
Speaker 2 (00:04):
That is such a big question.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
When journalist Antonette ler Toofe was fired from her casual
job at ABC Local Radio purportedly for sharing a Human
Rights Watch post, she could have just let it go
and moved on, but instead she chose to fight, and
her landmark win against the ABC has implications not just
for the rights of casual workers, but for how all
(00:29):
journalists in Australia report on GAZA.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I am relieved, I'm exhausted, I'm a bit shelf shocked.
I guess I knew that this was significant, significant for
a bunch of reasons, but I didn't quite anticipate just
kind of the amount of shock waves and conversations that
it would inspire around the country but also around the world.
(00:53):
And a little bit exposed.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Her case laid bare the efforts of lobby groups and
how those who should be upholding independence and impartiality failed,
with the judge finding senior ABC managers had panicked after
an orchestrated campaign by pro Israel lobbyists to have Miss
Latouff taken off air. I'm Ruby Jones and you're listening
(01:17):
to seven Am Today, co founder of at Media and
applicant in the legal case against the ABC and Network
two on why she fought at the future of journalism
in Australia. It's Thursday, July tenth, an Tonette. I wondered
(01:48):
if you could perhaps just take me back to where
all of this began, the day that you were fired
from the ABC. What happened?
Speaker 2 (01:57):
So I was contracted a short stint before Christmas to
do ABC Sydney local radio. So this is outside of
the remit of news and current affairs. I had been
a freelance journalist for a few years, so it wasn't
uncommon for me to be called in to go and
do local radio. And so it was day three in
(02:17):
which I was called into a room with my managers,
three of them that essentially fired on the spot, and
told to get my bags and leave. I was told
at the time it was for a Human Rights Watch post,
but I had also been made to wear a couple
of days prior that. As soon as I had walked
in it to the ABC, there was an email campaign,
lots and lots of complaints to the ABC board and
(02:40):
management about ever hiring me.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
The paper ob tenned dozens of leaked messages from a
WhatsApp group called Lawyers for Israel, whose members route to
ABC calling for Latouf to be sacked and threatening legal
action if she wasn't.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
And it was subsequently established by a leak from two
WhatsApp groups, but the one that's referred to most as
Lawyers for Israel. And these were lawyers and barristers and
heads of organizations or orchestrating to put pressure on the
ABC to fire me because they didn't like my views
on Gaza.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
Antoinette Latoufe was sacked this afternoon, as she should have
been for her anti Israel social media posts. Here's one
of those posts.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
Have a listen, Israelis get killed, Palestinians just die. Language matters,
Israelis are always killed. You can also use the word slaughtered,
barbarica tas victims and terrorism when describing their tragic debts
for Palestinians. Given the body can't exceeds ten thousand, best
to keep it ambiguous.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
How the hell did she ever think she was going
to keep a job at the ABC by doing that.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
I guess some people might think, oh, this has been
a big deal, and this has been a lot of
coverage and a lot of taxpayer dollars and legal fees
and whatnot over what is a five day contract, And
you know, to that, I would say it was never
about five days. More about what my treatment said about
the ABC's independence and also the implications for journalism more broadly,
(04:11):
if the ABC, which is our best of the best,
can't withstand pressure from external lobby groups at a time
when we're witnessing an unfolding genocide.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
And as you said, you've worked at the ABC many times.
You've been a journalist for a long time, for more
than fifteen years, and as part of that you've covered
court cases, and so you would know, as many journalists
would know, that in taking legal action against the ABC,
you're doing something that I think has the potential to
(04:42):
publicly define you, at least to some people. So when
you were weighing up whether to take this action, how
did you decide that doing this would be worth the fight?
Speaker 2 (04:52):
That's a really good question, because you are right as
a journalist and you cover court proceedings or you cover
defamation or whatever it is, you know it's a very
taxing and sometimes unduly unfair process, particularly on a woman
or someone from a minority in the way that they're
treated or represented. I think what I decided to do
(05:12):
was I knew that I would have to take hits.
I would have to take hits from tabloid press, I
would have to take huge financial hits because the phone
stopped bringing, the work stopped coming in as a freelancer.
But I guess I was driven because I knew that
this gonna sound so cheesy, but honestly, it's how I
was feeling that this is something that was far more
(05:32):
significant than just myself. That this was for the integrity
of our taxpayer funded public broadcaster. This was because I
had a position to do something to hold somebody accountable
when people feel really helpless with witnessing the human rights
atrocities daily ongoing in Gaza, and that anything that I suffered,
(05:55):
I'd be able to cop because the greater benefit and
the public benefit would be And I know that makes
me sound like I want to be some mother Theresa,
but like, if this was just an individual workplace grievance,
Like if it was just me and a manager and
we didn't get along and they were a bit rude
and someone bullied me, I probably would not have litigated.
But given the context, and given the time in which
we're in, I just felt it was more significant than
(06:17):
myself and I.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
Want to go through the trial blow for blow. We
all watched it play out. There was an incredible scrutiny
on your case. But I think one of the big
questions that I have for you is that after sitting
there and seeing all of those emails and messages that
were sent between people at the very top of the ABC,
what do you think now about the way that the
(06:39):
public broadcaster.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
Operates based on the actions and the words and the
testimonies of that board. I mean absolutely appalling, not just
in its treatment of me, in the descriptions of.
Speaker 5 (06:51):
Me asked about latouf Ida, Buttro's told the court in
relation to the Israel Garza conflict she was an.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Activist wishing COVID it on me.
Speaker 5 (07:01):
In an email, the ABC chair asked whether the two
had been replaced, suggesting she could get COVID or a
stomach upset.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
Referring to me as the Antoinette issue. We have an
Antoinette issue, like appalling, but just in terms of governance
of a board, like a real lack of integrity, lack
of leadership. They had eighteen months ample opportunity, and instead
of fixing it, the doubling and tripling down has done
irreparable damage to those particular individuals and their legacies, but
(07:31):
also to the organization writ large.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
After the break, my journalists are leading user rooms to
go independent.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
Today, the court has found that punishing someone for sharing
facts about these war crimes is also illegal. I was
punished my political opinion. I won't be taking any questions.
I'll have more to say in due time.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
And the federal court found that the ABC contravened the
fair work at by terminating your employment for reasons, including
that you held a political opinion opposing the Israeli military
campaign in Gaza. So when that judgment came down, what
was that like for you in court?
Speaker 2 (08:26):
I mean, it was vindicating. I always knew that that's
why I was treated the way I was treated. I
always knew that I had done absolutely nothing wrong, that
sharing the Human Rights Watch post wasn't a breach of
a management directive, and so I didn't feel this great
relief as I like, ah, you know, it was more
just like I felt the next vindication, but sadness. Sadness
(08:47):
that millions of dollars were spent dragging me through the mud,
and I think always assuming that I would just back
off and that they would get away with it.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
And none of the seeing A management who were involved
in your case are at the ABC anymore at about
true system there David Anderson, Grisoloda Taylor, but the current chair,
Kim Williams, he spoke in the Press Club. He said
that you were not sacked.
Speaker 6 (09:14):
Miss Lettoof was not dismissed. Miss Latoof was on our five.
Miss Latouff had a five day contract and under that
contract the contract was brought to a close at the
end of the third day.
Speaker 1 (09:29):
What does that say to you about the way that
the people who are currently at the ABC are thinking
about what happened and where the organization sits now.
Speaker 4 (09:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
So Kim Williams obviously came in after all of this,
and there was a lot of hope on outside that
he would come in and fix it up. He had
this kind of pr opportunity to go, this is a
new leadership, this is a new year. We're going to
do things differently. So when he stood at the National
Press Club and reiterated that I wasn't sacked despite the
Fairwork Commission finding that I was sacked. We were like, oh,
(09:59):
and then he was like and unlike Miss Latooth.
Speaker 6 (10:01):
We have been impeccably silent about the matter, unlike Miss
Latoof and her representatives who seem to have been devoted
to sharing on a regular basis with the media.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
And so then try to kind of like categorize me
as like why is she still talking? Like why is
she complaining? And so hearing kind of that derision in
his voice and him taking that stand really signaled to me, well,
the ABC hasn't learnt anything, it's not sorry about anything,
and it's not being held accountable.
Speaker 1 (10:31):
And to speak more broadly, across the Australian media landscape,
how common do you think it is for journalists to
have their reporting and their social media surveiled scrutinized when
it comes to the war at Gaza? What kind of
stories have you heard from people in the last two years?
Speaker 2 (10:49):
Oh? Yeah, across the board. And it's not only in
the media, obviously, it's not only at the ABC. It's
certainly not only in the media. It's across all sectors.
There's a level of surveillance and in pinging on freedom
of political opinion and freedom to assemble and freedom of speech,
even though I know that that's not a constitutionally you know,
enshrined right. Unlike the United States, we have seen a
(11:13):
stifling of an ability to voice, discuss, despair, concern about
what we're witnessing, and have witnessed live streams on our
phone in four K for the past two years. We've
seen you overreach and meddling in creative institutes, Academics bullied
out of jobs or stood down, doctors investigated by opera
(11:33):
after bogus claims. You know, doctors who say, you know,
we believe doctors and aid workers and healthcare workers shouldn't
be killed. But yes, I've heard currentless stories across the
industry of people either leaving because they can't bear it,
being pushed out, or just feeling really despondent about the
future of the media and their role in it. Because
we're meant to give a voice to the voiceless, We're
(11:56):
meant to speak truth to power. Except it seems as
though we can do this on like all topics, except this.
There's a big asterisk here. And yeah, and I guess
that's part of why Janfran and I have started an
independent media company we saw many of our friends and
colleagues just leave in despair, and we thought, well, no,
we don't want to We don't want to go because
(12:16):
you know, then, I guess those people in those WhatsApp
groups get what they want. They get us silenced and
sacked and unemployed. And so we are seeing a few
people trying to start independent offshoots.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Speaking of the WhatsApp groups, You've spoken about the role
of lobbyists several times, and I just wonder over the
course of the last couple of years, what you have taken,
what you've learned about how lobbying operates in practice.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
Well, like, lobbyists can lobby, it's what they do right,
And there are lobbyists of all stripes. There are lobbyists
across industries, across religious groups, across business groups, across government.
Opposition like ABC has always been lobbied. It's not something
that the pro Israel camp created. It's just when the
lobbyists are the loudest and only voice heard that I
(13:04):
think we have a real problem. And also when it
trickles down to audiences where they're like, we can see
that influence the way in which stories are framed and
who we humanize, and who we go to as an
authority and whose lives we deem more important, and the
adjectives we use to describe the loss of one life
as opposed to the loss of twenty thousand other lives.
(13:25):
I think audiences are rightly skeptical and if the ABC
wants to remain relevant and trusted as the most trusted
news source in the world, it needs to show that
it can withstand lobbying of any form.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
And I just had one final question. There's been a
lot of commentary around what makes a person a journalist
or an activist, and I wonder if you have thoughts
on who decides where that line is and what it's
based on.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
Absolutely, I have so many thoughts on that. It's so
funny because when the Murdoch Press want to do something
like they'll call it a campaign. So they're like, we
have a campaign to get work from home people, employees
back to the office, back to the CBD because CBD
cafes are struggling, And they're like, oh, that's cute. You
call that a campaign. Is that activism journalism? There are
(14:11):
certain topics in which we accept the journalists are allowed
to have an opinion on now we accept that climate
changing systs. You know, for a long time, sections of
the press denied it. And so if a journalist has
views critical of polluters, that's not considered activism journalism. And
so I see that that framing usually reserved for those
(14:32):
who have the least access to power. And so for me,
as a woman, and as a woman of an Arab background,
it's a way to discredit me, calling me an activist journalist,
irrespective of my years and years of experience across many
outlets and all these awards, and I've even started a
media not for profit and I've done all of these
things because I dare to have a political opinion rooted
in facts. Oh well, we can't trust her because she's
(14:54):
an activist journalist, and it's just not applied as liberally
to other journal So I think it's a convenient label
that tries to discredit somebody who either has a different
opinion or is getting too close to challenging power that
wants to remain unchallenged. That's my view.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
And Tonette, thank you for your time.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Thank you, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
You can hear more of Anette Latoof's work on the podcast.
We used to be journos from ET Media. We asked
Kim Williams to speak with us for this episode, but
he declined. In a public statement, current ABC Managing director
Hugh Marx said, we regret how the decision to remove
Miss Latoof from air was handled and the distress occasioned her.
(15:40):
We extend our sincere apologies to Miss Latouf and wish
her well in her future endeavors. Also in the news today,
the Ambonezi government says it's urgently seeking clarity after US
President Donald Trump warned countries can expect two hundred percent
(16:01):
tariffs on all pharmaceutical imports. In twenty twenty four, Australia
exported roughly two point one billion dollars of medicinal and
pharmaceutical products to the United States, and Treasurer Jim Chalmers
says he's seeking more detail on Trump's announcement. And Victoria's
Do Anti Hate Task Force has met for the first
time following a series of incidents in Melbourne, including the
(16:24):
fire bombing of the East Melbourne Synagogue. Premier Decenter Alan
says the group has heard from the Chief Commissioner of
Victoria Police, who says the force is ready to act
and respond to the incidents in a strong manner. I'm
Ruby Jones. This is seven am. Thanks for listening.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.