The Walkley awards were once derided by News Corp as “union awards” for union members primarily handed out to the ABC and Fairfax. This dated back to when you had to be a member of the journalists’ union, now the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, to enter. But those days are long gone and everyone is welcome to enter. In 2013 the Walkleys became a separate entity entirely and is now operated at arm’s length from the union.
But this didn’t stop some journalists blaming the union for dropping the international reporting category from the annual awards. The Walkley advisory board is now in receipt of a petition signed by 500 top media figures urging it to overturn the decision to axe the international category. “Reporting overseas also comes with specific risks and challenges,” the petition says. “It is not exclusively the domain of foreign correspondents – some of the most memorable reporting has also been delivered by Australian-based journalists on assignment overseas. The major international journalism awards, including the Pulitzer prize, all include a category for international reporting.”
The decision to drop the award came as a shock to everyone, despite claims from the board that it had consulted widely. Such a shock, Weekly Beast can reveal, that not even the chief executive of the MEAA, Paul Murphy, knew it was coming. Now some union members are asking if the Walkley Foundation is running counter to the views of the union members. “I’ve been a judge for many years and was not consulted in the process,” one member told Beast.
Union negotiation bid
The petition is not the only drama inside the Walkleys. At the Walkleys’ mid-year award celebration on 26 July the winner of the inaugural Helen O’Flynn and Alan Knight award for best industrial reporting will be announced. The new category recognises “outstanding journalism that captures the importance and the complexities of a robust industrial relations ecosystem for Australian workers and businesses”. Like all the Walkley awards, the industrial one is sponsored. Its sponsors include the ACTU, Unions NSW, Australian Super and the University of Technology Sydney. What could go wrong with an industrial award sponsored by the unions? Well as it turns out someone in the union movement did express their dismay about one of the nominees to an unimpressed Walkleys board member.
The entry in question was an Age investigation series by Ben Schneiders, Royce Millar and Nick Toscano which exposed how the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees union cut deals that leave workers without penalty payments. The union, better known as the Shoppies, was not amused. Weekly Beast understand the unnamed union official approached a member of the Walkleys board to express their dismay with the negative Shoppies story. They were told in no uncertain terms to back off. Sponsors have no say in the judging and it wouldn’t be the first time an unflattering story about a sponsor won a Walkley.
Dore defends future forecast
The editor of the Daily Telegraph, Chris Dore, has defended his much-maligned fictional front page Wake Up to the Future about a 2019 Bill Shorten-led government by saying it was satire.
Is that the key difference https://t.co/noJ1Oo2XZM
— Christopher Dore (@wrongdorey) July 5, 2017
Hilarious hypocrisy https://t.co/SVdYKQZ0wO https://t.co/EirGuyyJ8j
— Christopher Dore (@wrongdorey) July 5, 2017
Wednesday’s front-page story, written by the paper’s national political editor, Sharri Markson, attempted to portray a dystopia under Labor in 2019 if the Coalition doesn’t cease its infighting. After criticism by journos from HuffPo Australia and Pedestrian Daily, Dore called them “hilarious hypocrites” on Twitter. His point was that the two outlets had positively covered another spoof front page, this time in the Boston Globe in April 2016.
“The Boston Globe has won hearts around the world – and pissed off one of the richest, most powerful men in the world – in the past 24 hours,” Pedestrian TV reported.
“They’ve managed this by printing a fake front cover of their paper, to show people what the media landscape and normal life would look like if scarily Nazi-ish Republican candidate Donald Trump was voted in as president of the United States of America.”
A poll, and an apology
The bullying of Yassmin Abdel-Magied by the Australian media reached a new low this week after she announced she was moving to London. Owing to the News Corp papers following her every move, her decision to relocate was reported and Seven News followed up with a tasteless poll, which it later removed and apologised for.
“Do you support her decision to move to London or do you think she should stay and face her critics,” asked the poll which attracted more than 1,600 comments and 17,500 votes. Abdel-Magied asked for an apology for what she called trashy clickbait: “The outlet’s profiling of me in this way invites prejudice and discrimination.”
A News Corp senior journalist, Caroline Overington, appeared to agree with her, tweeting her disgust at the poll.
Guys, this is not cool. This is hurtful. pic.twitter.com/7StmAFuvee
— Caroline Overington (@overingtonc) July 4, 2017
But had Overington forgotten who the culprits were when it came to vilifying Abdel-Magied? As the engineer and media personality wrote in Guardian Australia on Thursday, 90,000 words have been written about her since Anzac Day. Surely Overington must realise many of those were in the Oz.
The hate Yassmin has experienced is not "just trolling". It has been fuelled by some of our most powerful: politicians, commentators, media. https://t.co/5E6VdCRutG
— Julia Baird (@bairdjulia) July 6, 2017
Lowy courts Colvin controversy
The Lowy Institute has named an address delivered at the annual Lowy Institute Media award dinner after the late ABC broadcaster Mark Colvin. The Mark Colvin lecture in honour of the late foreign affairs journalist and presenter of PM is a fitting tribute to the popular broadcaster who died after a long illness in May.
The 2017 Mark Colvin lecture will be delivered by Bret Stephens, a Pulitzer prize-winning writer whose hiring as a columnist by the New York Times caused an uproar this year. Stephens has a long history of making misinformed comments about climate change.
At least one of Colvin’s friends, the ABC journalist Jess Hill, is upset by the choice of speaker, saying it is an insult to his memory to have a speaker who is a climate denier.
Absolutely. A terrible disservice to a man who spent his life dedicated to accuracy and clear thinking. https://t.co/pv9gExorCn
— Jess Hill (@jessradio) July 6, 2017
The Lowy Institute’s executive director, Michael Fullilove, has responded to the criticism of the choice of speaker. “Mark was a supporter of the Media award and a regular attendee at the dinner,” he said. “He was also respected and admired by the staff of the Lowy Institute. For that reason we thought a fitting tribute to Mark’s remarkable career would be to name this lecture after him. In making that decision we consulted with Mark’s friends and family.
“Bret Stephens of the New York Times is one the world’s leading foreign affairs columnists. His work for the Wall Street Journal won him a Pulitzer prize for foreign commentary.
“The principal reason that the Lowy Institute invited Bret Stephens to deliver this year’s Media award lecture was because he has powerful and important things to say about the independence and role of the media in the age of President Trump, as he demonstrated in his acclaimed Daniel Pearl lecture.
“In future years we will host other speakers in this lecture series reflecting a diverse range of opinions, as is always the case at the Lowy Institute.”
