Alex Turnbull has demanded an apology from the Australian after the newspaper published an “exclusive” story which claimed he had donated to the campaigns of independent candidates Zali Steggall and Kerryn Phelps.
The story, headlined Alex Turnbull continues to wage war on the Coalition, contained no evidence that Turnbull had donated and relied on the non-denials from the two candidates in the NSW seats of Warringah and Wentworth: “Ms Steggall and Ms Phelps’s camps yesterday would not deny they had received donations from Mr Turnbull.”
Turnbull “appears to have donated to both Zali Steggall and Kerryn Phelps’s campaigns as he continues to wage war on the Morrison government after his father was deposed from the prime ministership,” NSW political editor Andrew Clennell wrote.
But the Singapore-based Turnbull told Weekly Beast that when Clennell called he told him he should “check AEC filings in due course but that I had not donated to those two campaigns”. Turnbull also said he was under no obligation to answer Clennell’s questions as he worked for a rightwing propaganda machine.
Clennell told Sky News on Thursday that Turnbull was “not being forthcoming with information”. “But kind of his lack of denials and those of Kerryn Phelps and Zali Steggall yesterday indicate that he is indeed donating to their campaign.”
Nice to see the idiot scribe @aclennell - after I explicitly stated I did not donate to either of these campaigns - saying I did. Even Pravda had better fact checking than this. #auspol pic.twitter.com/CNzqZn6waW
— 💧Alex Turnbull (@alexbhturnbull) May 1, 2019
Clennell stood his ground, arguing with Turnbull on Twitter for much of the day.
And it wasn’t a very good day. Independent candidate for Cowper Rob Oakeshott called him out for claiming in another story that he received support from GetUp.
Andrew, please immediately correct your story. I receive no support from GetUp!, and it is a false narrative. Either remove the story, or remove the paragraph. Thank you. #cowpervotes https://t.co/RfU8F0SQt8
— Rob Oakeshott (@RobOakeshott1) May 1, 2019
The article, which carried a joint byline with Brad Norington, now says: “An earlier version of this story claimed Rob Oakeshott was receiving backing from GetUp. Mr Oakeshott advises that this is not the case.” On Friday the paper published a correction.
Late on Thursday Clennell published a second story saying Turnbull had denied donating to the two campaigns but the original story remains online.
Poll dance
It’s been quite the week for fake news, with a front page story in the West Australian claiming a “blue-ribbon bloodbath” in the seat of Curtin.
“The Liberal Party is facing a huge swing of more than 20% against it in the prized blue-ribbon seat of Curtin, which would be the party’s worst result in the electorate since 1996, according to a new poll,” the paper reported.
Blue-Ribbon Bloodbath. Exclusive: Liberal vote slump in prized seat of Curtin delivers challenger a sniff of victory - https://t.co/4yggcsGIpY @AnnabelHennessy#frontpagestoday #Australia #TheWestAustralian pic.twitter.com/jfIIs8PLwE
— Front Pages Today (@ukpapers) April 26, 2019
Only the polling was fake, sent to an independent candidate as a hoax by an unknown entity and forwarded by an excited candidate to the West. The newspaper failed to verify it was legitimate and published it with a big red exclusive tag on Saturday.
Despite the blunder the paper remained upbeat, reporting the next day on the “fake poll scandal” under another “exclusive” tag by the same political reporter Annabel Hennessy who wrote up the original manufactured poll.
And the winner is …
When the news doesn’t go quite the way you want it to, there’s always another way to spin it.
The first election debate between Bill Shorten and Scott Morrison was held in Perth on Monday night, hosted by Seven West Media and broadcast on a Seven multi-channel.
The audience of 48 undecided voters gave the first debate to Shorten 25 to 12. Eleven were undecided. But not everyone was happy with the result, including the West Australian and the Australian which both came up with their own results which better suited their agendas.
“Opposition leader Bill Shorten may have won the audience in last night’s historic leaders’ debate, but the West Australian’s online readers had a very different viewpoint,” the paper reported.
The audience at last night's debate may have been won over by Bill Shorten, but an online poll shows a very different winner for readers of The West Australian: https://t.co/12Jx1ZqCct #auspol pic.twitter.com/lHQuY1xLFZ
— The West Australian (@westaustralian) April 30, 2019
“An exclusive poll published online last night in the lead-up to the debate garnered almost 6,000 responses on the preferred candidate across a range of key issues.
“Respondents were asked nine questions, including who their preferred prime minister was, who they trusted more and who was better placed to look after the environment.
“In contrast with the live studio audience at the debate, the readers overwhelmingly voted in favour of Scott Morrison.”
The Australian drew on its own line-up of commentators to declare that Shorten had not in fact won.
Paul Kelly said “neither leader won”; Simon Benson said Shorten “may have won the audience but Scott Morrison won the debate”; Caroline Overington said “there was no winner” and Troy Bramston said “there was no clear winner”.
On Friday there will be a second leaders’ debate, The People Decide, hosted by David Speers on Sky. Let’s hope these 100 undecided voters don’t have their verdict overruled too.
Drive by
The Sydney Morning Herald, now owned by Nine Entertainment, managed to report who won the Sydney radio ratings this week without mentioning the name of the broadcaster who has the number one drive program, the ABC’s Richard Glover. The story focused on the shock jocks of 2GB, Ray Hadley and Alan Jones, who continue to win the ratings despite controversies.
I’d like the Nine-owned Fairfax, for whom I work, to use my name when reporting how I beat their station, 2GB, to be number one in Drive. And why a “surprise” win? For me: news is not that shocking. https://t.co/h8h72sUygZ
— richard glover (@rgloveroz) April 30, 2019
Nine, which also owns the 2GB radio station through Macquarie Media, reported that it was a surprise that Glover had won. Glover, a veteran columnist on the Herald, was only surprised that the paper he writes for declined to mention his name.
“Elsewhere in the survey, ABC Sydney claimed a surprise win in the 4pm to 7pm slot, increasing 1.1 per cent to a 10.4 per cent audience share to leapfrog last survey’s win by smoothfm (up 0.1% to 10.3%),” the SMH said.
Close calls
Two ABC political reporters managed to put noses out of joint with their personal observations this week in the middle of an election campaign.
Canberra based ABC reporter Jane Norman scolded unnamed people who had never attended an Anzac day event, telling them to “get up early next year” in a sanctimonious tweet.
A quick scan of my Twitter feed suggests a lot of people have never attended a dawn service, a gunfire breakfast or a pub on Anzac Day. If you fall into that category - get up early next year. Seriously.
— Jane Norman (@janeenorman) April 25, 2019
Her colleague Jade McMillan penned an ABC opinion piece which claimed Bill Shorten was “under pressure” because his campaign wasn’t as “dynamic” as Scott Morrison’s – because the PM was, you know, “doing things”.
“Murmurings among the travelling press pack that Mr Shorten’s campaign appears to lack the dynamism of the Prime Minister’s have only grown louder during the last week,” McMillan wrote. “Scott Morrison is constantly captured ‘doing things’ — playing sport, picking carrots, going on a ride at the Royal Easter Show and even shearing a sheep. Mr Shorten still goes for morning runs but mostly likes to play to his strengths, drawing on his union background to speak to workers at construction sites and hospitals.”
A spokeswoman for the ABC said: “The story complies with the ABC’s editorial policies. It provides observations and insights from a journalist on the campaign trail.”
Perhaps the editorial policies should review the term “pick” in relation to carrots. You don’t pick carrots like you pick apples. You dig them up from the ground.
