Independent media faces an existential threat in the US, and will do so in Australia for as long as the Murdoch media and the Liberal Party work as partners in crime. This means a robust ABC is more important than ever.
So what was ABC chairman Kim Williams up to, straying a long way out of his lane to push the barrow of a clapped-out comedian who wants free publicity? It’s more than a koala can bear.
Monday night’s Media Watch exposed how the briefly famous Austen Tayshus (real name Sandy Gutman) enlisted Williams in his efforts to be interviewed on ABC regional radio. Gutman wanted to promote his comedy tour, some 40 years after his pun-filled spoken-word recording, Australiana, was all the rage on Australian music charts.
Surprise, surprise. Those regional radio hosts weren’t very interested and didn’t share the ageing star’s self-assessment as to his intrinsic worth. But as Media Watch showed, local reluctance wilted after Gutman contacted Williams. The chair passed his thoughts down the line, including his considered view that “our people are often arrogant” when it comes to interview choices. “I am of course essentially on his side,” he wrote of Gutman in an email.
Sorry not sorry
The story bursts with improbabilities. One is how the urbane Williams, who has run the elite of Australia’s cultural institutions, was ever in the same universe as pub comic Gutman, let alone close enough to respond to Gutman’s approaches and represent his cause.
Faced with host Linton Besser’s Media Watch evidence, Williams has said it was “inappropriate” to describe local radio staff as “arrogant”. But he is not the sort to say sorry. In a statement he denied any “improper exercise of authority”. He talked about “misunderstandings” and “erroneous assumptions” which may have arisen — expressing the kind of regret which manages to blame others as much as himself. He “understands” his role as chair, the role of management, and the different obligations which “repose on us separately”. Repose. It is the high language of the nobleman.
The reaction of ABC staff lies somewhere between pissed off and angry and incensed. They have every right to feel this way given they’re operating on the tightest of reins during the campaign, with every political utterance under the spotlight. They can also feel aggrieved at the evident double standard. In his brief tenure at the top, Williams has made it clear that the ABC must be truly independent and its journalists must not be activists or display bias.
Gloves are off
So is it a hanging offence? Technically, perhaps not. But his problem is something different. ABC staff will consider that he hasn’t lived up to the high standards he demands of them. He wants them to stay in their lane; he strayed outside his. Williams risks being a “do as I say, not as I do” leader. He may have wounded himself terminally over a comedian who made blue, funny-at-the-time jokes in his Australiana pun-fest about a female party guest who could go “outback” with “the fellas” because “she’s probably seen a cockatoo”. Boom boom!
The pity is that the ABC really needs serious leadership now. There might be a feeling of relief about the way the Coalition has performed in this campaign. We won’t know for sure until the weekend is done. But Peter Dutton ripped off the mask this week when it comes to the ABC.
The opposition leader began the campaign with a veiled threat to its funding, using his idea of excellence as a guide to what would and would not be on the chopping block. Now the ABC is simply part of “the hate media”. This is a long way from John Howard’s tempered hostility to the ABC. It is even further along from Tony Abbott’s naff accusation that ABC was never part of “Team Australia”. Dutton’s formulation is aimed at undermining the credibility of an important independent media outlet and playing favourites. It is an exact copy of Donald Trump and his “lying media” schtick.
On the attack
Does this threat disappear if the Liberals lose? Not likely. You only need to look as far as Dutton’s right-hand-man during the campaign, Victorian Liberal Senator James Paterson. In his former life at libertarian think-tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), Paterson was centrally involved in formulating the list of 75 “radical ideas” which the IPA wanted government to implement. No. 50 was “Break up the ABC and put out to tender each individual function”. (No. 51 was to privatise SBS, and No. 52 was to cut around 45,000 jobs from the public service.)
Dutton may or may not go, but the forces ranged against independent media will live on, backed primarily by the Murdoch press which has long campaigned for an end to publicly funded broadcasting. So if not this election, there’s another in three years.
At the same time developments in America could not be more shocking. As the ABC Alumni organisation points out, the Trump administration is cancelling Voice of America and is likely to stop all federal funding of public radio (NPR) and television (PBS).
Real threats
Last week the executive producer of the flagship CBS current affairs program 60 Minutes resigned over what he alleged was interference in the program’s independence from the network’s parent company, Paramount. The program took the extraordinary step of attacking Paramount on air, alleging that it was currying favour with the Trump administration as it sought government approval for a merger.
How does this relate to Williams? Protecting the ABC’s independence is hard work. Threats come from within and from outside. The political attacks are fierce and real. Technological change is a constant challenge. The idea of truth is malleable, to say the least. If Williams has failed to lead by example then he should step aside, no matter how trivial the cause of his problems might seem.
One thing is sure: if any further evidence emerges on his curious relationship with Gutman, Williams’ goose is cooked. It’s pretty much the last thing the ABC needs.
I’m wondering if it is because Gutman uttered the ‘magic’ word, at least as far as Chairs of the ABC are concerned – ‘antisemitism!!!
Gutman is a strong supporter of Zionist ideology
The threat of being labelled as antisemitic is the most obvious. The threats against the ABC if they are seen as the hate media are beyond extreme. This blow to Williams’s reputation lead to concerns about his, and the ABC’s future.
As I pointed out elsewhere. The ABC doesn’t need the external enemies that are cueing up to destroy it. There are plenty of potent sources within the organisation that are trashing it with a very efficient thousand cuts routine.
Spot on
The ABC is not even a shadow of its once august self. Kim Williams was the last hope but things have only deteriorated under his leadership.
It was not long ago Ita Buttrose made similar interference. Antisemitism then too was brought up. Not learning from example?
I’ll give it a go- can usually understand both sides of the argument!!
Seems that Williams is not quite the polymath he was painted to be on his appointment.Perhaps the skid mark from working for Murdoch refuses to budge.He should walk now, and give a minority Labor government a chance to correct their mistake, and set the ABC on a course that that will resurrect the Aunty we once loved.
While they’re at it, a Media Royal Commission focusing on the Murdoch trash is long overdue.
I worked at the ABC for more than a decade. It loses its balanced mind at senior levels every time a “Jewish” issue arises, or is fabricated by the relentless Jewish lobby bullies. Here we go again. Williams should resign, or at least make an effort to feel humiliated and ashamed.
There must be some investigative journalism on the influence of Zionism on the ABC and our political establishment. It has gone way past simply being a lobby group to be a very dangerous interfering body in our democracy
Without in any way ameliorating Mr. Williams actions and poor judgement on this occasion, I watched the Media Watch segment and was a little surprised that it gave such prominence to this matter. At a time when there is much to air, criticise and comment on in relation to the media generally, on a scale of ten it struggles to represent a 1-2.
To equate it to the actions and threats of the US President is something of a long bow, and, in my view, to put it in the context of the Opposition Leader’s veiled threats to the ABC (among others) runs the risk of diverting attention to those very real concerns about the future of the ABC and its role in public broadcasting. I think we need to keep our eye on the main game and not be distracted by sideline scuffles.
In the interests of full disclosure, many years ago I had a reasonably close business relationship with Mr. Williams. Based on that experience, I would say that this matter is quite out of character on his part and I would have full confidence in his capacity to stand up to whatever is thrown at him by the Opposition Leader or any other politician, current or future.
I think it was significant; it again demonstrated how easy policies and practices of the ABC are able to be influenced by outside lobbying, especially when the dreaded word ‘antisemitism’ is used. It makes one wonder how even-handed some of the reporting on the Middle East might be.
That is a good question. To my mind the ABC is too willing to accept the IDF/Netanyahu line on Gaza, not to mention Australia’s wimpy response. Thereby implicitly abetting the genocide. Coverage of the Syrian issue has been conspicuously shallow, essentially accepting the ‘reformed Jihadist’ line when it’s clear from other reports that Syria is heading down the Afghanistan path. There has been little exploration of America’s role in arming the rebels who now pretend to be a government while slaughtering Christians away from the media gaze. I think Russia’s support for Assad blinded the west, and Australia, to the fact that an American armed and supported a mob of jihadis who were intent on overthrowing a reluctant dictator leading a secular and once relatively stable country. Just one of the US’s many interferences in other countries.
I don’t think I have ever seen the ABC objectively analysing the claims of genocide and war crimes against Israel; instead they revert to the ‘he said, she said’ style of reporting.
I agree. It is a very significant call and Williams himself drew the link to the fact that this dude was Jewish. It is also a concern that Williams stepped outside his role and boundaries of responsibility for what might appear insignificant but how often has this happened in the dark and not so far out in the open. My guess is it is not impossible
The Government should stand up for the ABC and stop trying to curry favor of the Murdock Press.
Call them out every time they slip and do it on the ABC. It would increase the listening audience of the ABC
and give it more clout. Have the bloody Commission into the Media and stop calling it a ROYAL COMMISSION.
Good grief. Austen Tayshus visited our remote town recently and poured scorn on everyone in the room. Given no smart city venue would have him, I found that both amusing and offensive. His routine is racist, sexist and cringeworthy. I can’t believe Kim Williams would stick his neck out over someone like this.
Hi David. It is a long time since our ‘Four Corners’ days in 1995.
Yesterday I submitted my following opinion to ABC Complaints, calling for the resignation of the Chair. I stated:
” The conduct of the Chair of the ABC, as reported by the Media Watch team and Linton Besser on 28 April 2025, raises concerns that necessitate the Chair’s immediate resignation. The Chair has displayed a lack of understanding regarding the duties and responsibilities of a director. Moreover, the Chair’s denial of any attempt to “impose actions or outcomes on editorial managers” jeopardizes the integrity of the organisation if the Chair remains in office.
Given these circumstances, it is essential that other ABC Board Members act decisively to restore stakeholder confidence in the governance of the ABC.
I support Linton Besser’s assessment that the Chair’s actions represent “a grave lapse of judgement” and placed ABC editorial staff and managers in an “invidious position.”
While the Chair’s conduct has eroded my confidence in the ABC’s governance, the airing of the program highlights the courage and professionalism of ABC editorial staff and management in the face of pressure.
Regards,
Ali Cromie.
I later forwarded my complaint to the ABC MediaWatch team under the heading “Courageous program – call for resignation of Chair” with an email cc to the ABC Board.
Cheers, Ali
Hello Ali! Lovely to hear from you. And thank you for your view. Yes, it has been a long time..
A reminder that the monologue mentioned was written by Billy Birmingham, not Gutman
The thing I found most distasteful was the chairman’s implication that not interviewing Gutman would somehow be perceived as anti-Semitic. Showing that even the bullies can be bullied and the Israel lobby still has the ABC shit scared of its own shadow. Appalling and gutless. It means we have to assume that ABC journalism relating to Israel remains compromised – at least by a chairman, and possibly numerous executives – who are scared to stand for editorial independence. And here’s to the staff members who did stand up for it.
The moral of the story is probably that clapped-out Chairpersons should avoid commenting on clapped-out comedians. There should be an age limit on government appointments: no-one older than 60 or 65.
David, disagree with you about the age thing. Better to have an intelligence test (emotional, intellectual, spiritual,) and the limit applies to those who have low intelligence in any area. Oh, but then there may be no appointments! And even better, if applied to parliament, very few politicians!
What about journalists? Mr Hardaker, if not a winter chicken, is certainly autumnal. Does that count?
Autumnal. Very kind. Thank you!
By those standards I am a winterish employee of the ABC, commencing in ‘68 but like many I retain an affection for an institution I regard as essential to Australia’s media landscape especially given the dominance of the Murdoch media. I am concerned at what I see as the creeping commercialisation of the ABC with increasing appointments from outside organisations some quite overtly hostile to the ABC. While not suggesting Williams is hostile to the ABC his background at the Australian raised red flags for me. But John Lyons is an exception.
I found it interesting that John Lyon was moved from his Middle East reporting position.
John Lyons (sic) was not “removed from his Middle East reporting position.” John’s title was then “Global Affairs editor” and he covered essentially whatever he wanted to cover, for as long as he wanted to cover it – including Ukraine as well as the Middle East. He spent several months off-and-on writing a book on the Ukraine war, just published, and is now running the ABC’s Washington bureau. His choice. John of course would agree with many of the comments about the power of the pro-Israel lobby in Australia, but he is not a victim of it.
Good to see you weighing in Jonathan.
Glad to hear; obviously I was a little paranoid.
Silly me, here I was hoping that Kim Williams, a hatcher man from the reprehensible reptile media empire, might have returned ABC to its fearless independence and say damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead to principled and courageous editorial freedom. Instead, there has now been added a porky packer stooge, in the form of Hugh Marks (wasn’t Ita the liphping kid bad enough?), with both recycled warmed-over reprehensible reptile, and porky packer propaganda rammed down our throats. As a result, there is very little to cheer about, feeling dread that we have merely replaced the lithping kid, a porky packer stooge with a reprehensible reptile stooge and another porky packer. I am sure that there were plenty of competent people from the community media outlets, who would have done a remarkable job at running the ABC, and who understand the needs and strengths of a strong public broadcasting sector, rather than more pathetically rusted-on capitalists, and comprador stooges, from two of the most venal, unscrupulous, dictatorial and bigoted media tycoons that have ever existed, and, who both make William Randall Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer look like gentle social democrats by comparison.
I was impressed that Media Watch had the guts to call out Kim Williams. An excellent segment
Kim Williams is the typically Private School educated bod, with expectations that outmatch his own personal talents and traits formed within that environment.
Having said that he does have some interesting pastimes and maybe the musician/composer was looking to mix things up a little? Reverie perhaps?
So, it’s interesting that his foil has come from another who appears to suffer from the same issues, delusion. If we have been fortunate enough to have our ‘moment’ in the sun, why not be content with that?
ABC is certainly twisting in the wind.
The members of the ABC Board should remind the Chairman where his role (like theirs) begins and ends. Any Director of any organisation knows the vital importance of refraining from interfering in the daily running of the organisation, and of rejecting attempts by individuals or groups to curry favour or use personal relations to influence actions and outcomes. They may be inclined to move a motion of no confidence in their Chairman, to distance themselves from his behaviour. What Williams did potentially taints the Board as a whole.
Old Kim can’t really be blamed for his response to Gutman given that Gutman invoked the special word. However it’s a theme of the ABC Board to recoil when the word is used. Just look at the palava and court cases about sacking an Arabic speaking female journalist when she spoke about a global organisations recent report around Israel and Gaza.
I’d like to see a board more closely aligned to community structure. Unfortunately this won’t happen because of the nature of hard/soft power exerted by pollies, the rich and powerful corporations/faiths etc.
Gutman used a strategy and Williams fell for it and Besser pointed it out. Besser is the hero. The others are participants in an unconscionable profit driven leg up scheme for Gutman and a gross example of supplicancy by Williams. This must be surely against ABC ethos? Will the ABC have an ethics investigation into Williams. After all there must be organisational learnings to share.
I remember hearing a debate (many years ago) between Gutman and Anthony Lowenstein hosted by John Safran. Gutman was a bully and a committed Zionist. Based on that experience he came across as a very unpleasant individual.