February 5, 2025 • 13 mins
This week, the unfair dismissal case brought by journalist Antoinette Lattouf against the ABC is being heard in court. The case centres around a claim, by Lattouf, that she was fired by the ABC halfway through a short-term contract because of a post she shared to Instagram about the war in Gaza. The ABC is fighting against the claims and says the journalist was not unfairly dismissed. In today's deep dive, we'll revisit the allegations that led to this point, and unpack what we've learnt from the courtroom this week.
Hosts: Emma Gillespie and Lucy Tassell
Producer: Orla Maher
Want to support The Daily Aus? That's so kind! The best way to do that is to click ‘follow’ on Spotify or Apple and to leave us a five-star review. We would be so grateful.
The Daily Aus is a media company focused on delivering accessible and digestible news to young people. We are completely independent.
Want more from TDA?
Subscribe to The Daily Aus newsletter
Subscribe to The Daily Aus’ YouTube Channel
Have feedback for us?
We’re always looking for new ways to improve what we do. If you’ve got feedback, we’re all ears. Tell us here.
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):
Already and this is the Daily ARS.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
This is the Daily OS.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Oh now it makes sense.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Good morning and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Thursday,
the sixth of February. I'm emma, I'm losing This week,
the unfair dismissial case brought by journalist Antoinette Latouf against
the ABC is being heard in court. The case centers
around a claim by Latouf that she was fired by
the ABC halfway through a short term contract because of
(00:35):
a post she shared to Instagram about the war in Gaza.
The ABC is fighting against the claims and says the
journalist was not unfairly dismissed.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
So m This case has been a pretty big one
for the media industry because it involves the national broadcaster,
the ABC, and that broadcaster has been involved in a
very public, sometimes ugly dispute with this journalist Antoinette Latouf.
Can you take me back to the beginning, Where did
this all start?
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Yeah, it's been going on for a little while, and
it's taken many twists and turns, so it's been hard
to keep up with if you've just kind of been
seeing the headlines. So we are gonna bring everyone up
to speed today Antoinette Latouf is a Lebanese Australian broadcaster
and author. She founded the not for profit Media Diversity
Australia and she was hired by the ABC to host
(01:28):
a radio program for ABC Sydney and that was in
December twenty twenty three. She was hired to host this
program from the eighteenth to the twenty second of December
to fill in for the show's regular host, who.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Was on leave at the time.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Yeah so Latouf completed a few of those days hosting
the show under that short term contract, but halfway through
her contract was terminated.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Now.
Speaker 3 (01:54):
That was after ABC management raised concerns over a post
that Antoinette Latouf had shared on social media. It was
from Human Rights Watch and the post in question was
a video in which the organization Human Rights Watch claimed
Israel was starving civilians in Gaza as part of its
ongoing war with her mus Latouf is understood to have
(02:16):
shared this video to her personal Instagram account with the
comment human Rights Watch reporting starvation as tool of war.
Latouf was dismissed from her role on the twentieth of December,
two days before the contract was due.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
To finish, and then when she was dismissed. What reasons
did the ABC give her?
Speaker 3 (02:37):
So the ABC said Latouf was asked specifically not to
post about matters of controversy their words, and they argued
that she breached the organization's social media policy and this
directive by posting that Human Rights Watch video. So even
though it wasn't a post that Antonette Leatuf had made,
it was.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
The sharing of a post.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
There was a comment attached to that, and they argue
that that breaches that social media policy.
Speaker 1 (03:03):
At the ABC.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
As the national broadcaster, which means it's funded by taxpayer money,
the ABC has to uphold really strict impartiality standards to
ensure that it isn't using tax payer money in any
biased way. There are lots of conversations about this, about
the expectation on the ABC to report in an impartial
and unbiased way. The public documents of these editorial standards
(03:29):
are widely available and very lengthy. It is imperative or
it is part of its charter as the public broadcaster,
that it adheres to those unbiased standards. Central Tilatouf's claim
is that ABC management made the decision to fire her
after a quote coordinated campaign against her by a group
(03:51):
of pro Israel lobbyists. Those claims have been strongly disputed
by the ABC as this case unfolds in court this week,
and have been disputed by the ABC since this story
broke over a year ago.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Now, so she's let go from this contract, and she
says that dismissal was not legal to do.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Do we know why?
Speaker 3 (04:13):
So? Antoinette Leateuf says that she was unfairly dismissed on
the basis of her political opinion and race. So under
the Fair Work Act, which is federal legislation about the
rights of workers, an employer must not terminate your employment
for a number of reasons, including things like being on
parental leave or being part of a trade union.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
So there are certain rights that are protected under this act.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
The Act also says you can't terminate someone's employment on
the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, physical
or mental disability, marital status, family or caress, responsibilities, pregnancy, religion,
political opinion, national extraction, or social origin. It's a long list,
a long list, but it is central to what La
(05:00):
Twof is arguing. Her claim is that the ABC's management
made a decision to fire her after a quote coordinated
campaign against her by a group of again quoting pro
Israel lobbyists. Those claims have been strongly disputed by the
public broadcaster as the case unfolds in court this week.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
So the case has come to court obviously. Now it's
been a fairly long time between December twenty twenty three
and February twenty twenty five. Were there any other steps
before we got to court?
Speaker 3 (05:34):
Yeah, So the reason that this has been so stretched
out over more than a year now is that there
have been steps to avoid I suppose you could argue
from either side getting to this point in the federal court.
L two filed a complaint to the Fair Work Commission
last year based on those same allegations that I outlined earlier,
and during that process, the ABC denied the claims, as
(05:58):
it continues to do so, argued it didn't technically dismiss
latoof because she was paid through the full five day contract,
so she didn't complete five days of work, but her
contract was paid in full. The ABC also said that
it was legally allowed to ask Latouf to quote politely
leave after she had breached what they've argued is a
(06:18):
breach of the broadcaster's social media policy, and in the
end in June, the Fair Work Commission rejected the ABC's arguments,
saying Latoof was dismissed, but it didn't reach a decision
on whether or not that was fair. So the unfair
dismissal argument, I suppose, has now continued and the commission,
(06:40):
the Fair Work Commission allowed Latouf to pursue federal court
action to answer that question. So that is where we
find ourselves now.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
I see when cases are before the federal court, sometimes
the judge will make a decision that the proceedings can
be live streamed if they're going to be not too
sensitive or if they're going to be in something called
the public interest, which given that this involves the public broadcaster,
it's easy to understand why that's been the case. So
we have been able to watch some of the proceedings
(07:07):
on the live stream this week.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
What have we heard?
Speaker 3 (07:10):
So on Monday we heard the opening statement from Latoof's
legal team, so they've sort of set out the arguments
by Antoinette Latouf, the accusations against the ABC, and what
was new in those opening arguments was excerpts from private
messages and emails between ABC Managing Director David Anderson, it's
(07:32):
chair at the time, Ita Buttrose, and Chief Content Officer
Chris Oliver Taylor. Now all three of those senior executives
have left or are leaving their positions at the ABC.
The court was told that these executives set in messages
to each other that Antoinette was an issue or a
quote Antoinette issue, and that.
Speaker 1 (07:53):
Her socials were quote full of anti Semitic hatred.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
According to Latouf's lawyer, the former chair Ida Buttros said,
I have a whole clutch more complaints. Can't she come
down with flu or COVID or a stomach upset? We
owe her nothing now. Some of those complaints that that
text from Buttrose is referring to were also read out
by Latoof's lawyer, but the judge ruled that none of
(08:19):
the identities of those complainants could be revealed in court.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
So then on Tuesday, there was a focus on Latoof's
mental health in some of the evidence that was presented.
What do we hear of that?
Speaker 1 (08:31):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (08:31):
So on day two of these hearings, the court heard
that Antoinette Latouf had turned to alcohol, sleeping aids, self medicating,
to help with this psychological fallout that she says she's
experienced since being dismissed. She also claimed that there have
been threats made against her, which New South Wales Police
did confirm to The Sydney Morning Herald that they are
(08:53):
currently investigating. So that kind of paints this picture from
Latouf's team that she has suffered psychologically.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
As a result of this dismissal.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
During cross examination on Tuesday, the ABC's legal team focused
on the perceived benefits to use their words, that Latouf
had accrued since the incident in December twenty twenty three.
So they pointed to her being awarded prizes, launching a podcast,
seeing a sharp increase in her Instagram followers, and launching
(09:22):
a conference. Kind of this idea that since the incident,
Antoinette Latouf has actually benefited rather than has suffered. In
terms of what these arguments are on this, the ABC's
council questioned, quote, does being the poster girl for justice
or humanity or a free and fair press pay very well?
Speaker 2 (09:42):
So then on Wednesday it was the ABC's turn. We
heard from their lawyer making the ABC's opening statement, and
then from the managing director, David Anderson. Emma, what kinds
of things were they saying.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Yes, So the latest from the Federal Court is that yesterday,
as you said, lou See, the ABC's lawyer gave the
Public Broadcasters opening statement. Ian Neil is the name of
their lawyer, and he argued that the external pressure didn't
have any impact on the decision to dismiss latoof from
her contract after the first day that she was on air.
(10:15):
So she went on air on the Monday, a raft
of complaints came in, they were assessed. Antonette Latouf went
back to work the next day. According to the ABC's arguments,
and Neil said that the ABC had told Latouf more
than once not to post about the situation in Gaza
and not to mention it on air. In the afternoon yesterday,
(10:36):
we also heard from the outgoing managing director of the ABC,
David Anderson. Now he took to the stand and was
cross examined by Latouf's lawyer. He admitted the personal social
media of ABC employees isn't subject to the broadcaster's editorial
policies around balance and neutrality. So we had mentioned earlier
(10:59):
in the episode about you know those editorial standards that
the Public Broadcaster is beholden to. But then that kind
of distinction about what their employees are expected to do
online in terms of public statements, though, Anderson said presenters
are quote not removed from air if it's not a problem.
If they do something that is otherwise considered to be
(11:21):
undermining their effectiveness of work, then yes, they might be
sanctioned for it. He added, we can't regulate what they do.
We can judge what they do afterwards that we can't
regulate what they do. People can have freedoms, they'll do
what they want on social media, so we can't regulate
what they do.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Interesting, it's certainly a challenge that every journalist and every
news company in the country around the world is conscious
of being a public figure in some respects and having
this job that requires neutrality in order to have trust.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
Exactly, And I think the kind of bigger picture of
social media's role in advocacy something that employers probably everywhere
have grappled with, not just in public facing industries, not
just in the media. But you know, where do you
draw the line between an employee and the company they're representing.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Yeah, exactly. So the case is continuing throughout this week.
Not sure when we'll have ultimately a judgment in that case,
but we will certainly bring you the updates when we
have them. Thanks so much for explaining that to me, Emma.
Speaker 3 (12:26):
Thank you so much for joining us today, Lucy, and
thank you so much for listening to today's episode of
The Daily Os. If you liked it or if you
learned something from this episode, please.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Feel free to share it with a friend.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Make sure you are following or subscribed wherever you listen
or watch the Daily Ods. We do have a YouTube
with our video podcast if you want to check us
out over there in the flesh.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
Have a great day. We'll be back the Savo with
some headlines.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
My name is Lily Madden and I'm a proud Aarunda
Bungelung Kakutu woman from Gadigol Country. The Daily oz acknowledges
that this podcast is recorded on the lands of the
Gadigol people and pays respect to all.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
Aboriginal and torrest Rate island and nations.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
We pay our respects to the first peoples of these countries,
both past and present.
Already and this is the Daily ARS.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
This is the Daily OS.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Oh now it makes sense.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Good morning and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Thursday,
the sixth of February. I'm emma, I'm losing This week,
the unfair dismissial case brought by journalist Antoinette Latouf against
the ABC is being heard in court. The case centers
around a claim by Latouf that she was fired by
the ABC halfway through a short term contract because of
(00:35):
a post she shared to Instagram about the war in Gaza.
The ABC is fighting against the claims and says the
journalist was not unfairly dismissed.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
So m This case has been a pretty big one
for the media industry because it involves the national broadcaster,
the ABC, and that broadcaster has been involved in a
very public, sometimes ugly dispute with this journalist Antoinette Latouf.
Can you take me back to the beginning, Where did
this all start?
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Yeah, it's been going on for a little while, and
it's taken many twists and turns, so it's been hard
to keep up with if you've just kind of been
seeing the headlines. So we are gonna bring everyone up
to speed today Antoinette Latouf is a Lebanese Australian broadcaster
and author. She founded the not for profit Media Diversity
Australia and she was hired by the ABC to host
(01:28):
a radio program for ABC Sydney and that was in
December twenty twenty three. She was hired to host this
program from the eighteenth to the twenty second of December
to fill in for the show's regular host, who.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Was on leave at the time.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Yeah so Latouf completed a few of those days hosting
the show under that short term contract, but halfway through
her contract was terminated.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Now.
Speaker 3 (01:54):
That was after ABC management raised concerns over a post
that Antoinette Latouf had shared on social media. It was
from Human Rights Watch and the post in question was
a video in which the organization Human Rights Watch claimed
Israel was starving civilians in Gaza as part of its
ongoing war with her mus Latouf is understood to have
(02:16):
shared this video to her personal Instagram account with the
comment human Rights Watch reporting starvation as tool of war.
Latouf was dismissed from her role on the twentieth of December,
two days before the contract was due.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
To finish, and then when she was dismissed. What reasons
did the ABC give her?
Speaker 3 (02:37):
So the ABC said Latouf was asked specifically not to
post about matters of controversy their words, and they argued
that she breached the organization's social media policy and this
directive by posting that Human Rights Watch video. So even
though it wasn't a post that Antonette Leatuf had made,
it was.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
The sharing of a post.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
There was a comment attached to that, and they argue
that that breaches that social media policy.
Speaker 1 (03:03):
At the ABC.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
As the national broadcaster, which means it's funded by taxpayer money,
the ABC has to uphold really strict impartiality standards to
ensure that it isn't using tax payer money in any
biased way. There are lots of conversations about this, about
the expectation on the ABC to report in an impartial
and unbiased way. The public documents of these editorial standards
(03:29):
are widely available and very lengthy. It is imperative or
it is part of its charter as the public broadcaster,
that it adheres to those unbiased standards. Central Tilatouf's claim
is that ABC management made the decision to fire her
after a quote coordinated campaign against her by a group
(03:51):
of pro Israel lobbyists. Those claims have been strongly disputed
by the ABC as this case unfolds in court this week,
and have been disputed by the ABC since this story
broke over a year ago.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Now, so she's let go from this contract, and she
says that dismissal was not legal to do.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Do we know why?
Speaker 3 (04:13):
So? Antoinette Leateuf says that she was unfairly dismissed on
the basis of her political opinion and race. So under
the Fair Work Act, which is federal legislation about the
rights of workers, an employer must not terminate your employment
for a number of reasons, including things like being on
parental leave or being part of a trade union.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
So there are certain rights that are protected under this act.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
The Act also says you can't terminate someone's employment on
the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, physical
or mental disability, marital status, family or caress, responsibilities, pregnancy, religion,
political opinion, national extraction, or social origin. It's a long list,
a long list, but it is central to what La
(05:00):
Twof is arguing. Her claim is that the ABC's management
made a decision to fire her after a quote coordinated
campaign against her by a group of again quoting pro
Israel lobbyists. Those claims have been strongly disputed by the
public broadcaster as the case unfolds in court this week.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
So the case has come to court obviously. Now it's
been a fairly long time between December twenty twenty three
and February twenty twenty five. Were there any other steps
before we got to court?
Speaker 3 (05:34):
Yeah, So the reason that this has been so stretched
out over more than a year now is that there
have been steps to avoid I suppose you could argue
from either side getting to this point in the federal court.
L two filed a complaint to the Fair Work Commission
last year based on those same allegations that I outlined earlier,
and during that process, the ABC denied the claims, as
(05:58):
it continues to do so, argued it didn't technically dismiss
latoof because she was paid through the full five day contract,
so she didn't complete five days of work, but her
contract was paid in full. The ABC also said that
it was legally allowed to ask Latouf to quote politely
leave after she had breached what they've argued is a
(06:18):
breach of the broadcaster's social media policy, and in the
end in June, the Fair Work Commission rejected the ABC's arguments,
saying Latoof was dismissed, but it didn't reach a decision
on whether or not that was fair. So the unfair
dismissal argument, I suppose, has now continued and the commission,
(06:40):
the Fair Work Commission allowed Latouf to pursue federal court
action to answer that question. So that is where we
find ourselves now.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
I see when cases are before the federal court, sometimes
the judge will make a decision that the proceedings can
be live streamed if they're going to be not too
sensitive or if they're going to be in something called
the public interest, which given that this involves the public broadcaster,
it's easy to understand why that's been the case. So
we have been able to watch some of the proceedings
(07:07):
on the live stream this week.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
What have we heard?
Speaker 3 (07:10):
So on Monday we heard the opening statement from Latoof's
legal team, so they've sort of set out the arguments
by Antoinette Latouf, the accusations against the ABC, and what
was new in those opening arguments was excerpts from private
messages and emails between ABC Managing Director David Anderson, it's
(07:32):
chair at the time, Ita Buttrose, and Chief Content Officer
Chris Oliver Taylor. Now all three of those senior executives
have left or are leaving their positions at the ABC.
The court was told that these executives set in messages
to each other that Antoinette was an issue or a
quote Antoinette issue, and that.
Speaker 1 (07:53):
Her socials were quote full of anti Semitic hatred.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
According to Latouf's lawyer, the former chair Ida Buttros said,
I have a whole clutch more complaints. Can't she come
down with flu or COVID or a stomach upset? We
owe her nothing now. Some of those complaints that that
text from Buttrose is referring to were also read out
by Latoof's lawyer, but the judge ruled that none of
(08:19):
the identities of those complainants could be revealed in court.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
So then on Tuesday, there was a focus on Latoof's
mental health in some of the evidence that was presented.
What do we hear of that?
Speaker 1 (08:31):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (08:31):
So on day two of these hearings, the court heard
that Antoinette Latouf had turned to alcohol, sleeping aids, self medicating,
to help with this psychological fallout that she says she's
experienced since being dismissed. She also claimed that there have
been threats made against her, which New South Wales Police
did confirm to The Sydney Morning Herald that they are
(08:53):
currently investigating. So that kind of paints this picture from
Latouf's team that she has suffered psychologically.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
As a result of this dismissal.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
During cross examination on Tuesday, the ABC's legal team focused
on the perceived benefits to use their words, that Latouf
had accrued since the incident in December twenty twenty three.
So they pointed to her being awarded prizes, launching a podcast,
seeing a sharp increase in her Instagram followers, and launching
(09:22):
a conference. Kind of this idea that since the incident,
Antoinette Latouf has actually benefited rather than has suffered. In
terms of what these arguments are on this, the ABC's
council questioned, quote, does being the poster girl for justice
or humanity or a free and fair press pay very well?
Speaker 2 (09:42):
So then on Wednesday it was the ABC's turn. We
heard from their lawyer making the ABC's opening statement, and
then from the managing director, David Anderson. Emma, what kinds
of things were they saying.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Yes, So the latest from the Federal Court is that yesterday,
as you said, lou See, the ABC's lawyer gave the
Public Broadcasters opening statement. Ian Neil is the name of
their lawyer, and he argued that the external pressure didn't
have any impact on the decision to dismiss latoof from
her contract after the first day that she was on air.
(10:15):
So she went on air on the Monday, a raft
of complaints came in, they were assessed. Antonette Latouf went
back to work the next day. According to the ABC's arguments,
and Neil said that the ABC had told Latouf more
than once not to post about the situation in Gaza
and not to mention it on air. In the afternoon yesterday,
(10:36):
we also heard from the outgoing managing director of the ABC,
David Anderson. Now he took to the stand and was
cross examined by Latouf's lawyer. He admitted the personal social
media of ABC employees isn't subject to the broadcaster's editorial
policies around balance and neutrality. So we had mentioned earlier
(10:59):
in the episode about you know those editorial standards that
the Public Broadcaster is beholden to. But then that kind
of distinction about what their employees are expected to do
online in terms of public statements, though, Anderson said presenters
are quote not removed from air if it's not a problem.
If they do something that is otherwise considered to be
(11:21):
undermining their effectiveness of work, then yes, they might be
sanctioned for it. He added, we can't regulate what they do.
We can judge what they do afterwards that we can't
regulate what they do. People can have freedoms, they'll do
what they want on social media, so we can't regulate
what they do.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Interesting, it's certainly a challenge that every journalist and every
news company in the country around the world is conscious
of being a public figure in some respects and having
this job that requires neutrality in order to have trust.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
Exactly, And I think the kind of bigger picture of
social media's role in advocacy something that employers probably everywhere
have grappled with, not just in public facing industries, not
just in the media. But you know, where do you
draw the line between an employee and the company they're representing.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Yeah, exactly. So the case is continuing throughout this week.
Not sure when we'll have ultimately a judgment in that case,
but we will certainly bring you the updates when we
have them. Thanks so much for explaining that to me, Emma.
Speaker 3 (12:26):
Thank you so much for joining us today, Lucy, and
thank you so much for listening to today's episode of
The Daily Os. If you liked it or if you
learned something from this episode, please.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Feel free to share it with a friend.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Make sure you are following or subscribed wherever you listen
or watch the Daily Ods. We do have a YouTube
with our video podcast if you want to check us
out over there in the flesh.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
Have a great day. We'll be back the Savo with
some headlines.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
My name is Lily Madden and I'm a proud Aarunda
Bungelung Kakutu woman from Gadigol Country. The Daily oz acknowledges
that this podcast is recorded on the lands of the
Gadigol people and pays respect to all.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
Aboriginal and torrest Rate island and nations.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
We pay our respects to the first peoples of these countries,
both past and present.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!