In a debate about migration, the ABC had to present multiple views. But where to draw the line? | Weekly Beast
The ABC’s decision to host its second National Forum on the subject of migration was always going to give rise to some tricky calls about whose voices should be heard.
Among those invited to take part was Conrad Gillard of Down Under Reform, one of the seven people who addressed panellists during Monday’s program.
Gillard received coverage in News24 this year after starting a petition, which has received almost 30,000 signatures, to reduce the annual immigration rate to zero until the median house price in all capital cities decreases below five times the median annual income. The Sydneysider’s argument on the ABC was centred around his housing concerns, telling the panel he backed One Nation’s migration policy but it could have “gone a little bit further”.
Down Under Reform’s Facebook page, which has 7,000 followers and is run by Gillard, displays controversial views beyond housing concerns. He regularly posts about the dangers of Muslims and “African gangs”, as well as sweeping claims about India’s “extremely low standard of living”, which he attributes to “nepotism” – although also asserting that “many come to Australia precisely to escape [corrupt] practices”.
Other posts have blamed migrants for illegal dumping and violent crime, and claimed that immigration is “erasing our culture”.
After the program Gillard posted a video thanking the ABC for the opportunity to contribute, saying: “I hope my appearance played a role in normalising the idea of net-negative immigration, as Australians who support this are typically only heard on social media.”
A spokesperson for the ABC said the purpose of the National Forum was to “give viewers an accurate representation of the range of views and beliefs on migration that are held in the community”.
“The program also presented viewers with facts and full context in order to challenge various perspectives and enabled audiences to reach their own informed views,” it said.
The Today show is being turned into a “digital commerce engine”, Nine has breathily declared in its showcase for the year ahead. On Thursday at Sydney’s Barangaroo Nine unveiled a sweeping push to in-house advertising, with a new “Sofa to Street” marketing strategy “designed to shape culture, move audiences at scale and accelerate commercial growth to Australian advertisers”.
As part of this, “Shop Today” will transform its flagship breakfast program, turning viewing into a “seamless shopping experience connecting audience trust with click-to-buy commercial conversions”.
What does that mean? An Australian-first “content-to-commerce engine” will distribute on-air promotions across social media and mastheads, with each live broadcast product review segment supported by an online article and embedded video allowing viewers to buy items directly from the website, effectively turning nine.com.au into a “digital storefront”. Fun!
Nine Entertainment’s chief executive, Matt Stanton, said the strategy would allow the business to “challenge global Big Tech platforms by delivering unmatched, trusted local scale”.
“‘Sofa to Street’ represents a landmark shift in national media capability, but it will also transform how our partners buy media,” he said. “With up to a third of digital video spend in Australia swallowed up by non-transparent tech fees and complex programmatic supply chains, we believe the industry deserves better transparency and real accountability.”
It’s not the only shake-up at Today. After the spectacular firing of Karl Stefanovic this year, and departure of its long-term host Sarah Abo while on maternity leave, Sylvia Jeffreys and Tom Steinfort were unveiled as the new presenters to steer the program into 2027.
The announcement did not shy away from the fact that Today is heading into shopping channel territory, linking the appointment of Jeffreys and Steinfort to “a new dawn” of “commercial integrations”.
Jeffreys is the current co-host of Today Extra, while Steinfort is a long-term presenter for Nine.
Who’s behind the JJ podcast?
The podcast at the centre of Pauline Hanson’s controversial comments about Indigenous Australians was little known before the interview, conducted last September, resurfaced and made national headlines. So who are Jaimee Rogers and Jaimie Johnstone of the JJ Podcast?
Rogers ran unsuccessfully as a Liberal candidate for Warringah in the 2025 federal election and left the JJ Podcast this year when she received a solo spot on News24, then Sky News. No new episode of the podcast has aired since April, but her co-host, Johnstone, has gone it alone on social media, where she has amassed about 27,000 followers on Instagram for her conservative political commentary. She has also been picked up by News Corp, writing opinion pieces for the Daily Telegraph and appearing as an occasional guest on News24 programs.
Days before their interview with Hanson aired, the podcast’s account was banned from TikTok, apparently in relation to comments made about identity politics, but the platform subsequently said the account had been “erroneously flagged by our systems and has since been restored”.
after newsletter promotion
In the short life of the podcast, which was launched in July last year, the pair received seemingly unfettered access to conservative politicians. Before Hanson guests included John Howard, Tony Abbott, Bridget McKenzie, Tim Wilson, Jane Hume, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and Warren Mundine. It had just 8,000 subscribers on YouTube and rarely received more than a couple of hundred views on that platform, although News24 reported the Abbott interview had “more than 100,000 views”.
Hanson gave a qualified, “if-I-offended-people” apology on Tuesday for the remarks.
Not so the podcasters, who allowed Hanson’s comments to pass without challenge. The episode, which remains live, is promoted as a “straight-talking, unapologetic discussion on politics, patriotism, and the future of conservatism”.
Hugh’s through
After almost five decades in journalism and 17 years with Channel Ten, Hugh Riminton is hanging up his boots. In a note to colleagues on Wednesday, the national affairs editor announced with “mixed emotions” that he would leave the network on 2 October.
“I got my first job as a cadet reporter aged 17. I am now 65,” he wrote. “48 years in daily news is probably enough. This reporter’s life has given me the world. I leave with nothing but gratitude for every hour of it.”
Riminton’s award-winning career has included stints with Nine as a foreign correspondent and with CNN as a senior political correspondent and host of Meet the Press, before joining Channel Ten.
The vice-president of news for Paramount Australia, which owns Network Ten, Martin White, said Riminton was “rightly celebrated as one of the premier journalists in this country” and had made a “vital impact” on Australia’s media and democracy. “My regard for him is impossible to adequately put into words, a sentiment I’m sure you all share,” he said.
Riminton, who has been covering the Alan Jones trial as one of his last assignments, said he intended to support his son as he completed his HSC and spend some time with his father, who is almost 98. “After that,” he wrote, “I am sure projects will emerge to keep me busy.”
In another big departure, Anton Enus presented his final SBS World News bulletin last week after 27 years with the broadcaster. “At a time of manufactured distrust and wilful misinformation I hope that you will continue to watch SBS as a source of reliable news,” he said in his signoff. Enus will be succeeded by Catalina Flórez.
Another post bites the dust
The Adelaide Advertiser has apologised and removed a social media post from its Instagram page after it received a number of “false and misleading claims” in the comments section directed at the AFL umpire Nick Foot.
In May Foot briefly made headlines over his employment with Sportsbet, now ceased, which emerged in the fallout from a heated exchange with the Port Adelaide player Zak Butters the previous month.
Butters was fined $1,500 by the AFL tribunal after it found that on the balance of probabilities he had responded to a contentious decision by saying to the umpire: “How much are they paying you?”
The player strongly denied saying that and the case was dismissed on appeal over the conduct of a tribunal panel member.
In the wake of the tribunal’s verdict, the Advertiser reported on the abusive messages Foot had received as a result of the Butters saga.
The article’s online version received only one comment but the Advertiser’s apology makes clear that was not the case for the Instagram post – it’s unclear when the claims were made on Instagram or why the post was taken down several months after the article was published. The Advertiser was contacted for comment.
As Guardian Australia has reported previously, news organisations are largely at the whims of major platforms when it comes to hateful rhetoric on social media.
KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.