It used to be in the 18th century that “patriotism was the last refuge of the scoundrel”.
In the 21st century it’s racism. And free speech.
It’s amazing, even admirable, how with lightening speed the left attempts spin everything through the lens of race even when the original infraction was nothing to do with race.
What’s being attempted is the creation of a narrative couched in victimhood.
With Claudine Gay at Harvard it was plagiarism, but she tried to make it about race and being a woman of colour.
With the Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis, it’s about prosecutorial misconduct after her dalliance with the prosecutor she appointed to go after Trump which under the cover of a church service last Sunday, she was also attempting to spin and deflect into being about race.
And now with Antoinette Latouff it’s about social media postings, but she too along with her like minded confreres at their ABC is attempting to spin, fabricate and craft a different narrative based on race and trying to conflate it with free speech in an attempt to buttress her case before the Fair Work Commission.
Dear Jim,
I could write a huge essay on the dismissal of Ms Lattouf. She is taking her matter before the court.
I shall narrow it to two points: what can one express when working in the media and the expression of supporting a particular view on the current conflict in the Middle East.
First, what can one express outside the employ of a media organisation?
If I am working in the media especially the ABC, does your personal World view inform how you report and comment on the news and is that view contrary to what is reported on air is a dismiss able reason?
I am aware that Ms Lattouf supports those in Gaza as opposed to those in Israel.
It goes to a bigger issue. Given the ABC is biased towards the favouring of climate change and the recent “The Voice” referendum, can a person outside their work, especially the ABC express views contrary to the promoted narratives of climate change and “The Voice”?
ABC presenters should not express their views whether for or against a group of people, for or against climate change and for or against “The Voice” or ANY issue.
It is bad optics that when reporting an issue on the ABC and express a view outside the ABC whether on social media or book.
An example are books and media reports against Cardinal Pell (RIP). The HCA unanimously found that there was no evidence against Cardinal Pell (RIP).
Second, the situation in the Middle East is not as simple as what happened from October 2023. This has been a tit-for-tat exchange and some larger tit-for-tat exchanges EVEN before the formation of Israel in 1948.
The situation in the Middle East, ‘ME’ has been further exacerbated by other interests using local citizens in ME countries including those in the Red Sea region as proxies for external parties who want to see the abolition of Israel.
In conclusion, media workers especially those on the ABC should not comment on social media or other media giving the impression that their reporting is biased. The ABC should blanket ban its media workers from expressing.
Given the ABC knew of Ms Lattouf’s views before joining the ABC should not then selectively dismiss her. The ABC should not have allowed her on air.
At the same time the ABC should ban people from expressing views for and against an issue. It’s bad optics even though the ABC is perceived to be biased.
Finally the ME problem is not a simple commenting for or against a group in a tit-for-tat that happened after the 7th October 2023.
The events of October 2023 have been complicated by external players using ME and Red Sea citizens as proxies.
Thank you