GERARD HENDERSON’S MEDIA WATCH DOG

ISSUE – NO. 756

28 November

* * * *

* * * *

THE LATEST

  • Sally Sara fails to challenge Greens senator’s hyperbole that Australians can positively affect the South Australian climate

On Friday 28 November, Sally Sara interviewed Greens Party Senator Sarah Hanson-Young on ABC Radio National News Breakfast. The topic was the agreement between the Albanese Labor government and the Greens on the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025.

Let’s go to the transcript where the interviewer raised the suggestion that the new environmental laws might be damaging to businesses:

Sally Sara: How can you guarantee that these targets won’t be damaging to the economy, to business?

Sarah Hanson-Young: Well, I look at the state of our environment and its connection with the economy. I look at what’s going on in South Australia right now, where our tourism industry has been smashed. Our fishing industry has been smashed. Local businesses, who, who, trade on our metro, along the metro coastline, and along the regional areas coastline, they have been smashed because of the toxic algal bloom that has come about because of our warming oceans. And you cannot continue to pretend that somehow the economy is off over there while the environment has nothing to do with it and that the climate has nothing to do with it. If we want a strong economy, we have to transition. We’ve got to do it faster. We’ve got to, we’ve got to invest in the clean, green economy, and we’ve got to support businesses and industry to transition and the community wants it. No one told South Australians that when the climate crisis hit they wouldn’t be able to go to the beach in the 40 degree heat over summer. That is what we are facing in this summer, and South Australians want action. Australians want action. The world needs action.

Sally Sara: Just finally as part of broader negotiations, you secured $50 million in additional funding for the ABC. How did this come about? Was there an approach from the ABC to the Greens?

Note that Comrade Sara did not challenge Hanson-Young’s claim that somehow Australia, which is responsible for around one per cent of global emissions, can have an impact on global warming.

In short, the Greens Party senator got an interruption-free free kick on the taxpayer funded public broadcaster to effectively state that what is called action on climate change in Australia can assist the fishing and tourism industry in South Australia. What a load of absolute tosh.

  • Linton Besser’s taxpayer-funded media-watchers take a 10-week “Well Earned Break”

Last Monday – 24 November – Linton Besser – presenter of the taxpayer-funded ABC TV Media Watch – announced that Media Watch was about to go on what journalists like to call a Well Earned Break (WEB). He ended the final (trivial) segment of the program by commenting “Now, as we draw tonight and the year of Media Watch to a close…”. Comrade Besser ended 2025 Media Watch with: “See you in 2026.” But did not say precisely when.

So ABC TV Media Watch which has a staff of about 10 for a program that runs for 15 minutes once a week – when it is not on a WEB – has gone on a WEB effective immediately. This means that the soviet which sets itself as the moral guardian of the Australian media will be on-the-beach from Tuesday 25 November 2025 until probably Monday 2 February 2026 – a 10-week long WEB.

Your Taxes at Work.

[For the first-rate critique of Linton Besser’s Media Watch see Chris Mitchell’s column titled “ABC Collusion: Media Watch falls prey to Trump derangement syndrome” in The Australian’s “Media” section on 24 November 2025. – MWD Editor.]

  • ABC self-censors the transcript of Sabra Lane’s interview with Ted O’Brien

ABC AM presenter Sabra Lane interviewed Opposition shadow treasurer Ted O’Brien on Thursday 27 November.  Lane initially interrupted O’Brien after he had said a mere 20 words. Let’s go to the transcript:

Sabra Lane: Interest rates could go up next year, following the hotter than expected inflation reading yesterday. Several economists are now changing their forecast to say the bank will probably lift rates next. What particular policy decision would you make right now, if you were treasurer, to take that pressure off, to stop that from happening?

Ted O’Brien: Sabra, the first decision I would make would be to introduce quantifiable fiscal rules for the budget. So, ever since –

Sabra Lane: [interjecting] Woah, now for people listening –

However, O’Brien’s comments made sense – he was proposing fiscal limits re spending – along the lines introduced by treasurer Peter Costello in the Howard government. Lane’s “woah” interjection was not reflected in the ABC’s transcript.  Convenient, eh? Later on, the following exchange took place:

Ted O’Brien: So what’s the first thing for the government to do?  It has to stop its spending spree.  How do you do that?  You introduce these rules. But what would you cut?  Well, it’s not so much about cutting immediately –

Sabra Lane: [Interjecting]  Really?

Lane’s mocking “really?” interjection is also not in the ABC’s transcript.  Later on, Lane declared to O’Brien:

Sabra Lane: The government might point out it would have been less than that had the Coalition had its way and blocked the tax cuts for Australian income earners.

Turn it up. It’s not the role of an ABC presenter to speak on behalf of the  Albanese government – or any other government. If Comrade Lane wants to speak for the Labor Government, she should apply for a job in the Prime Minister’s Office.

  • ABC chair Kim Williams attacks the late Sir John Kerr while claiming to speak for the ABC about the Dismissal

 Lotsa thanks to the avid Kiama reader who drew Media Watch Dog’s attention to the Museum of Australian Democracy’s seven-hour-long coverage on 11 November 2025 of the Dismissal, half a century ago, of Gough Whitlam’s Labor government by Governor-General Sir John Kerr. This occurred after the Coalition led by Malcolm Fraser insisted on blocking supply and Whitlam insisted on governing without supply.

The Museum of Australian Democracy (MOAD) very much resembles the ABC. Both are taxpayer-funded. And both are left-of-centre organisations whose programs are invariably devoid of viewpoint diversity. Oh yes – former ABC journalist and Labor Party staffer Barrie Cassidy is chair of the MOAD.

Next week, MWD will look at the inaugural panel discussion which featured Barrie Cassidy, former Labor minister Gareth Evans, Paul Kelly and Kerry O’Brien. Enough said – for now. Comrade Cassidy once worked for Bob Hawke, Gareth Evans is a former Labor minister and “Red Kerry” O’Brien once worked for Whitlam. Kelly is a prominent journalist/author but has been a long-time critic of Kerr.

The program commenced with an address by the Governor-General Ms Sam Mostyn AC followed by – wait for it – ABC chair Kim Williams AM. This is how his 13-minute long [Groan – MWD Editor] speech was presented by MOAD as “Framing a discussion on the 1975 Dismissal – a political crisis not a constitutional one” commenced:

Kim Williams: It’s my great pleasure to follow Her Excellency as the Museum of Australian Democracy reflects on one of the most monumental days in our nation’s political history. I come wearing three hats. The first is a relative by marriage of the Whitlam family with views on the Dismissal – some gained, in part, through extensive discussions with Gough Whitlam himself. The second as Chairman of the ABC with the duty of promoting objective, informed public debate. The third as a citizen and a great believer in democracy, free speech and open discussion.

Your man Williams then proceeded with an anti-Kerr rant. He started off by offering – yes, offering – “10 core theses”. A bit like that Protestant chap Martin Luther who (allegedly) nailed his 95 Theses on a church door. The somewhat prolix ABC chair went on to state: “I offer these five principles”. How pompous can an ABC chair get? – with ten theses and five principles.

During Williams’ “offerings”, he chose to believe Malcolm Fraser over John Kerr with respect to a phone call on the morning of 11 November 1975. Then he stated that if Kerr had not acted on 11 November then some Liberal Party senators would have voted to pass supply. There is no unchallenged evidence for this assertion. And then Williams declared that Kerr should have accepted Whitlam’s proposal to have a half-Senate election – despite the fact that this would not have resolved the conflict – as Paul Kelly, a critic of Kerr, has acknowledged on many occasions. In short, contrary to his promise, Williams did not promote objective and informed analysis during his rant in Old Parliament House.

Then Pompous Kim concluded:

Colleagues, I hope that, over this day, we have collegiate, respectful debate and engagement as we set out on this journey to analyse, offer unique recollections and perspectives. Let’s put the maintenance of democracy first. It’s very much more fragile than many people think. Thank you.

Well, thank you Mr Williams concluding your speech and commencing the MOAD’s “journey” on that morning. Which raises the question: What is Kim Williams doing getting involved in a political debate when speaking “as chairman of the ABC with the duty of promoting objective, informed debate”? Especially when his address was highly subjective and, on occasions, ill-informed. And here’s another question: Can You Bear It?

  • Niki Savva’s Earthquake

 Nine newspapers’ columnist and Insiders’ panellist Niki Savva’s latest book Earthquake was released on Monday.  She received a special run on last Sunday’s ABC TV’s Insiders and on ABC Radio National’s Late Night Live on Wednesday when she was interviewed by David Marr for an extraordinary 55 minutes re which see below.

The highlights of the Savva’s Insiders appearance was when presenter David Speers first mentioned Earthquake. Let’s go to the transcript:

Niki Savva: They [the Liberals] have an identity crisis. They have an existential crisis. We are watching the Liberal Party disintegrating before our eyes. …When I was talking to people for my book, which is out tomorrow –

David Speers: We’re about to talk about the book, there it is.

Niki Savva: Yay.

David Speers: Hold it up for us, Earthquake.

[Niki Savva holding up book]

 David Speers: The book Niki, congratulations on Earthquake. It’s just been released.

In fact, Ms Savva only flashed her book at the ABC panel – the ABC’s very own Tom Crowley and former ABC and Nine journalist Mark (“Please call me Professor and don’t ask anyone about my lack of publications”) Kenny and presenter David (“I like to be called Speersy”) Speers.

There is nothing that the ABC likes more than a one-time Liberal Party politician or staffer bagging the Liberal Party. Comrade Savva was always a leftie – it’s just that she calls herself a “conservative leftie” – (whatever that might mean) and she got a job with the Howard government. Before emerging as a critic of every Liberal Party leader since John Howard except the constant Liberal Party critic Malcolm Turnbull.

In any event, Comrade Savva did not disappoint as she bagged the Liberal Party and its leading figures. She was especially tough on Opposition leader Sussan Ley. Let’s go to the transcript where the following exchange took place:

Niki Savva:  So, the point that came through there, and also comes out through the book, is that she [Sussan Ley] never actually stood up for anything. She never staked out any territory. She never, you know, fought for anything. And that has continued in the leadership.

Mark Kenny: She would say as deputy leader, though, that she had a job to try and unite the party and she had a job to support the leader, presumably. Would that be her response to that?

 Niki Savva: Well, maybe it was, but she wouldn’t speak to me for the book….

How about that? Savva is hostile to Ms Ley, partially, because she would not talk to her.  Perhaps Sussan Ley has read Savva’s 2010 book So Greek: Confessions of a Conservative Leftie where Savva wrote “Journalists can, and do, get away with lying.  Politicians and staff can’t. Nor should they.” Who knows? Maybe Sussan Ley does not trust the Nine columnist because she once wrote a book implying that it was okay for journalists not to tell the truth.

By the way, virtually all the prominent Liberals to whom Comrade Savva spoke to got bagged in Earthquake.

Then on Wednesday 26 November Savva had a near hour-long interview with the left-of-centre David Marr on the left-of-centre Late Night Live (aka Late Night Left). But this time Niki Savva was a little hoarse due to all the promotion she had undertaken for Earthquake. So much so that, at the end of the interview, your man Marr recommended that she drink tea with honey. [How sweet. – MWD Editor.]

For his part, Hendo heard the commencement of the Marr/Savva mutual admiration society on Late Night Left. Then he headed to read a chapter of Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace. When he returned to LNL, Savva was still going. So Ellie’s (male) co-owner asked himself: Can You Bear It?

[Ok – but you should cover the Savva/Marr political love-in next week. I’m sure that avid readers would be interested. By the way, as the saying goes, I’m re-reading War and Peace, for the first time. – MWD Editor.]

  • Patricia Karvelas’ false prophecy

Journalists should not attempt to be prophets. They should take advice from Ellie’s (male) co-owner who acts in accordance with the saying that it is unwise to make predictions especially about the future.

This is what happened when Patricia Karvelas interviewed Environment Minister Murray Watt on ABC’s Afternoon Briefing last Tuesday about the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025:

Murray Watt: We’ll keep working this through. I want to repeat, we are going to pass these laws this week.

Patricia Karvelas: Okay, I’ve got to – I’m going to challenge you on this. Because you don’t have the numbers and the kind of – isn’t that a bit arrogant? I’m going to say it.

Murray Watt: I don’t think it’s arrogant. I think –

Patricia Karvelas: [interjecting] Well, you don’t have the numbers. So how are you so sure? You’ve got to convince people, and you haven’t.

Murray Watt: Well it’s only Tuesday, Patricia.

Patricia Karvelas: Yeah it is.

Murray Watt: We’ve got two full days, which, you know, we’re prepared to sit till the wee hours if we need to on each of those days. We’re prepared to sit Friday if we need to, to get this done…

By Thursday night, PK’s prophecy turned out to be false and Labor passed The Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025. Well, at least PK (as she likes to be called) knew what day it was on Tuesday – even if she came up with a false prophecy for Thursday. Can You Bear It?

  • Annabel Crabb gives a left-wing spin on modern Australian political history

Avid readers will recall that in recent weeks the ABC has been airing a three-part documentary on Australia’s political system titled Civic Duty. The program is presented, executive produced and written by Annabel Crabb.

The first two episodes hosted a line-up of left-of-centre commentators: Judith Brett, Richard Denniss, Abbie Chatfield, Waleed Aly, Niki Savva, George Megalogenis, Cam Wilson, Dee Madigan, etc, etc. You get the picture.

The array of left-of-centre commentators Annabel Crabb found for Civic Duty

The third and final episode went to air on Monday 24 November. Much of it focused on the decline in support for the major parties and the growth of the crossbench. Unsurprisingly, this is given a positive spin, let’s go to the transcript:

Antony Green: The declining support for Australia’s major political parties comes down to changes in the complexion of the Australian society.

Niki Savva: Australia is, you know, very diverse, very culturally different country from what it was a couple of decades ago.

This is an attractive narrative for those on the left. But aside from perhaps the election of Dai Le in Fowler, do any of the recent victories for Independents have anything to do with an increasingly diverse electorate? The recent major change has been wealthy, not particularly diverse seats in the leafy suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne voting for the Teals.

Senator Fatima Payman is then brought on to talk about how voters are moving away from the “major party duopoly”. Of course, Senator Payman was elected in 2022 as part of that duopoly, on the Labor ticket. Her new party “Australia’s Voice” ran candidates at the 2025 election and fell short of 1 per cent in every state.

The two previous episodes featured Crabb visiting the Tennessee-Virginia state line and striding around Washington DC. This time she is instead shown visiting Denmark to discuss its regular minority governments. Perhaps executive producer Annabel Crabb could have considered sending presenter Annabel Crabb to somewhere a bit closer that regularly has minority governments? New Zealand comes to mind. Oh well, it’s only taxpayer dollars after all.

Near the end of the program, a montage is shown of the record number of Indigenous members of parliament. At first Ellie’s (male) co-owner thought Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price had been left out. However, on rewatching she does appear – but so briefly it barely registers. According to an in-depth technical analysis conducted exclusively by MWD Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price appears on screen for less than one third of a second. See below for the blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo.

 

Finally, Comrade Crabb gives a soaring monologue about Australian history. Here is the transcript, with accompanying notes about the images on screen.

Annabel Crabb: Sometimes it divides us. [Anti-Iraq war protests circa 2002]

John Howard: We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come. [Images from the Tampa affair]

Annabel Crabb: Or ignores people it shouldn’t. [Brittany Higgins addressing the March 4 Justice outside Parliament]

Or looks away from problems that seem too hard to fix. [A rally protesting Black deaths in custody]

But at other times we’ve made hard decisions together. [Parliament celebrating the Yes vote at the gay marriage plebiscite]

Malcolm Turnbull: Australia has done it!

Annabel Crabb: Which have built prosperity. [Paul Keating as Treasurer]

Newsreader (archival footage): Paul Keating floated the Australian dollar.

Reporter (archival footage): When phones started ringing in trading rooms this morning trading was frenetic.

Annabel Crabb: Improved lives. [Gough Whitlam, Bob Hawke and Anthony Albanese]

Newsreader (archival footage): Medicare will provide every permanent resident with basic health insurance.

Annabel Crabb: This is how democracies change. [Vaccines being manufactured and Scott Morrison receiving a COVID vaccine]

Sometimes it’s an agonising, unconscionably slow process. [Footage around the apology to the Stolen Generation]

Kevin Rudd: To the pain, suffering and hurt of these stolen generations.

Annabel Crabb: Driven by persistence.

Kevin Rudd: We say sorry.

Annabel Crabb: And courage. [black and white footage of Indigenous people casting votes]

Protestor: We don’t want the GST!

John Howard: This country desperately needs a new taxation system.

Annabel Crabb: Sometimes change is born quickly out of shocking events. [Guns being surrendered after the Port Arthur Massacre]

John Howard: There is no other way, there is no other way!

Annabel Crabb: If a democratic parliament is a conversation between the government and the governed. [More footage of celebration of the gay marriage plebiscite and Indigenous people voting followed by footage from the anti-Israel protest on the Sydney Harbour Bridge]

Protestor: Gaza cannot wait another day.

Annabel Crabb: This one is listening more closely than it once did.

 

So, there you have it, a succinct, distinctly left-wing account of modern Australian political history. With Labor as the heroes and Liberals as the villains, except for when they are taking away guns or legalising same-sex marriage. And all ending with opposition to Israel, the great left-wing cause of the moment.

A QUELLE SURPRISE! MOMENT

  • ABC Supremo Hugh Marks reckons it might be a you-beaut idea to present different perspectives on the ABC

Hugh Marks – ABC’s recently appointed managing director and editor-in-chief – addressed the National Press Club in Canberra on 19 November. He delivered a dull speech – no doubt written by the ABC Communications team – but his presentation livened up somewhat during the Q&A period.

And what was the Quelle Surprise! Moment? – Media Watch Dog hears avid readers cry. Well, it was part of an answer which Hugh Marks gave to a question from The Australian’s Jack Quail. Let’s go to the transcript:

Jack Quail (The Australian): As Managing Director, you also serve as editor-in-chief of the national broadcaster. And in that capacity, I’m wondering if you can nominate any areas that you think are particularly underserved or need improvement in the ABC’s coverage? If you could nominate any areas where you think that the ABC can improve?

Hugh Marks:…I want to see more parts of Australia on the ABC. I want to see those human interest stories more and more. We do many great programs that do it, but I think that is something that we can do more of, in general, our coverage. I think the other thing is that we’ve got to do more. And again, this is something that we’ve been speaking about.

And I guess the departure of Q+A has sort of, you know, risen this as both a challenge and an opportunity, is sometimes I think. Obviously the ABC, where factual accuracy, impartiality, objective perspectives, these are all the important things. But sometimes maybe we need to, you know, we do it well on audio, but maybe we also need to do it on television. Provide program formats that enable different relevant perspectives to meet in a more of a town hall format, a town hall style, rather than our journalists having to present balance in different relevant perspectives. So, I do feel that we need to embrace that town hall notion a bit more and have program formats that enable that. So, we are bringing what are the relevant perspectives to Australians to them. In a way that’s engaging and impactful. And so those are two areas that I think, yes, we’re constantly talking about and working on at the moment.

In somewhat prolix language, your man Marks said that it would be a you-beaut idea if ABC News and Current Affairs put on programs that provide “different relevant perspectives” and “embrace the town hall notion a bit more”. In other words – give viewpoint diversity a chance.

Brilliant, eh? Give the man a bonus – and so on. It remains to be seen whether a person like Hugh Marks from the commercial media can have an impact on the ABC staff collective – or soviet – which runs the Conservative Free Zone that is the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster. Time will tell – as the saying goes.

Verily, a Quelle Surprise! Moment.

DOCUMENTATION

Scant viewpoint diversity in ABC TV’s hit job on the late Sir John Kerr

On Monday 17 November ABC TV’s News Channel showed the documentary Whitlam Dismissal: 50 Years. It was presented and written by journalist Greg Jennett. Emily Smith was the executive producer.

As is the wont of the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster, Jennett essentially presented the case against Governor-General Sir John Kerr who dismissed Labor Prime Minister Gough Whitlam on 11 November 1975. The Coalition Opposition, led by Malcolm Fraser, blocked supply and Whitlam attempted to govern without supply. In the event, Kerr resolved the conflict by dismissing Whitlam and appointing Fraser as prime minister pending a double dissolution election on 13 December 1975 which the Coalition won in a landslide.

Jennett interviewed eight individuals who appeared on Whitlam Dismissal: 50 Years. In order of appearance, they were former Labor Party senator John Faulkner, journalist Leigh Hatcher, former Whitlam staffer Richard Whitington, singer Patricia Amphlett who sang Labor’s It’s Time theme song, former ABC journalist Ken Begg, the Governor-General Sam Mostyn, former Liberal Party senator Scott Ryan and former Liberal Party senator Peter Baume.

Of the Jennett Eight, four were Kerr antagonists – Ken Begg, Richard Whitington, John Faulkner and Patricia Amphlett – while two were critical of Kerr’s decision – Sam Mostyn and Peter Baume. Scott Ryan, a former president of the Senate, supported Kerr’s decision as the only way to resolve the issue. And Leigh Hatcher was an observer of events. For his part, Jennett was dismissive of Kerr – see, for example, today’s Correspondence section.

And who did all the talking? – MWD hears avid readers ask. Well, here’s MWD’s little list of the word-count:

Word Count:

Greg Jennett 1237

Richard Whitington 451

Sam Mostyn 327

Ken Begg 272

Leigh Hatcher  236

John Faulkner 207

Scott Ryan 159

Patricia Amphlett 118

Peter Baume 122

John Faulkner, without credible evidence, alleged that Kerr had betrayed Whitlam. Ken Begg, without evidence, asserted that Australian democracy was at stake due to the Dismissal, Richard Whitington, without evidence, alleged that “some foreign interference was involved in the Dismissal” and Patricia Amphlett told viewers how she “cried” on the day. Peter Baume, who voted to block supply in 1975, conceded in retrospect that supply should not have been blocked.

Moreover, in a surprise intervention, the Governor-General Sam Mostyn supported Fraser’s post-1986 account of a phone conversation he had in the lead-up to the Dismissal and rejected Kerr’s 1975 version which he repeated in 1978 and 1987. No evidence was supplied by the Governor-General Sam Mostyn for believing Fraser over Kerr. This account will be analysed in next week’s issue.

Which leaves Scott Ryan as the only defender of John Kerr – and he received less on-air time than either Begg or Whitington or Faulkner – not counting the Governor-General.

That’s “balance” ABC-style. As an avid Sydney reader has pointed out – Sky News’ documentary The Dismissal: 50 Years On, which aired on 11 November, heard from those who agreed and disagreed with Kerr’s decision as well as those who supported and criticised Whitlam plus some neutral observers. This was presented by Chris Uhlmann – Richard Andrews was the executive producer. But the ABC ran the old “Kerr’s a Bastard” line which let Fraser and Whitlam off-the-hook. Despite the fact that Fraser and Whitlam (both stubborn individuals) were responsible for the political crisis which Kerr resolved.

As for the most lightweight moment of the documentary – try this exchange for size:

Greg Jennett: Call it revenge, gallows humour or simply mischief. Ever the loyal Labor staffer, Richard Whitington set about inflicting a little sabotage before closing the door on this memorable chapter.

Richard Whitington: The phone system was called a Commander. There was a big console with a whole lot of buttons on it, and each button had someone’s name. So there was the secretary, the Prime Minister’s Department. There was, you know, the media secretary and so forth. And I’m ashamed to confess that I went into the office, had one last look around, and I swapped all the buttons around so that when Fraser took over and he wanted a cup of tea, he’d hit “tea lady” and it would connect him to the head of the Prime Minister’s Department.

Greg Jennett: You may have in some small measure, made the early days of the Fraser prime ministership somewhat chaotic.

Richard Whitington: I did it. I’ve not heard any reports to the effect that it had any impact. I souvenired my own button that had Whitington written on it, and I kept it for a very long time. And the other day, I actually gave it to one of my grandsons as a memento.

What a load of absolute tosh. Does anyone care what Comrade Whitington, at the age of 28, did to the phone system in the Prime Minister’s Office half a century ago? In any event, the incoming administration would have changed the phone system. And did the PM’s phone really have a “tea lady” button? And here’s another question. Does anyone care that 150 words out of Comrade Whitington’s total of 451 words was devoted to much unmemorable verbal sludge about phone systems and tea ladies?

One-time Gough Whitlam staffer talking to Greg Jennett on ABC TV’s Whitlam Dismissal: 50 Years about attempting to deny new prime minister Malcolm Fraser easy access to, wait for it, the (alleged) tea lady.

This overwhelmingly popular segment of Media Watch Dog usually works like this. Someone or other thinks it would be a you-beaut idea to write to Gerard Henderson AC (aka Always Courteous) about something or other. And Hendo, being a courteous and well-brought-up kind of guy, replies. Then, hey presto, the correspondence is published in MWD – much to the delight of its avid readers.

There are occasions, however, when (the late) Jackie’s (male) co-owner decides to write a polite note to someone or other but does not receive the courtesy of a reply. Nevertheless, publication of this one-sided correspondence still takes place in MWD. For the record – and in the public interest, of course.

  • Gerard Henderson to Greg Jennett re his (false) claim that the late Sir John Kerr chose self-exile in England

On 17 November, ABC TV ran the program Whitlam Dismissal: 50 Years on News Channel – it is available on iview. The reporter/writer Greg Jennett made a false claim about the late John Kerr. There is no evidence that Comrade Jennett made contact with any of Kerr’s family, friends or acquaintances before asserting that Kerr went into self-exile following the Dismissal on 11 November 1975. Gerard Henderson wrote to Mr Jennett about this on 24 November. Now read on – s’il vous plait.

 

Gerard Henderson to Greg Jennett – 24 November 2025

Greg

I recently watched on iview Whitlam Dismissal: 50 Years which, as I recall, ran on ABC TV’s second channel.  As I understand it, you were the writer of the script which is an ABC News Production. I would like to draw your attention to an error in the documentary.  Just before your interview with Governor-General Sam Mostyn was shown, the following dialogue took place:

Greg Jennett: After the Dismissal, Kerr would be spurned, scorned and ridiculed – eventually choosing self-exile in England, defensive until death.

John Kerr: I know what price I paid for what I did. Have no regrets about what I did, because it was right.

This is misleading.  After he stepped down as governor-general in November 1977 (two years before the end of his scheduled term), Sir John and Lady Kerr lived for some years in England – where Kerr wrote his book Matters for Judgment (Macmillan 1978). However, he returned to Australia and lived in retirement in Milson’s Point/Neutral Bay, Sydney.

I first met Kerr at a function in Sydney in early 1987 and I interviewed him in late 1987 for an article on The Dismissal which was published on 30 January 1988 in The Weekend Australian. I had a number of lunches with Kerr in the second half of the 1980s and he had lunch at our home in Hornsby on one occasion.  Also, Anne and I attended a couple of Christmas parties at Kerr’s apartment. Fellow attendees included current and former senior judges of the High Court of Australia and the Supreme Court of New South Wales and more besides.  Sir John was not universally “spurned, scorned and ridiculed” in his retirement in Australia – he had many friends and supporters. I attended Sir John Kerr’s memorial service at St James in Sydney.  The church was packed.

It is just a myth – put around by Kerr’s antagonists – that the former Governor-General went into “self-exile in England”. In my view, this highly subjective, unprofessional and factually inaccurate put-down should be removed from the iview version.

Yours sincerely

Gerard Henderson

cc:      Emily Smith, Executive Producer

Justin Stevens – Director, ABC News

 

Emily Smith to Gerard Henderson 27 November 2025

Hi Gerard,

Thank you for watching Whitlam Dismissal: 50 years. We don’t want the audience to be left with the incorrect impression that John Kerr stayed overseas until his death.

To make it abundantly clear, we’ve changed the voiceover to say: “After the Dismissal, Kerr would be spurned, scorned and ridiculed. In the years that followed he chose to live in England. He returned to Australia, where he remained defensive until death in 1991.”

The documentary is a great piece of work by Greg Jennett which will have value for audiences for many years to come, it’s important to us that it doesn’t include any ambiguities.

The documentary will be updated on ABC iview and for future plays on News Channel.

Kind regards,

Emily

 

Gerard Henderson to Emily Smith – 27 November 2025

Emily

I refer to your response to my email to Greg Jennett. Please tell Greg that I answer my own correspondence.

Initially you state: “Thank you for watching Whitlam Dismissal: 50 years. We don’t want the audience to be left with the incorrect impression that John Kerr stayed overseas until his death.”

This is a disingenuous way to refrain from conceding that the program made an error with respect to the late Sir John Kerr. Greg did not leave the audience with an “incorrect impression”. Rather he stated falsely that Kerr chose “self-exile in England, defensive until death”. Clearly Greg did not do any fact-checking. Somewhat unprofessional, don’t you think?

Moreover, did Greg Jennett ever contact anyone who knew Sir John Kerr before he came to his conclusion that Sir John Kerr was “spurned, scorned and ridiculed”? Sure, by some. But he was supported by many others – and his book Matters for Judgment was a bestseller. Jennett’s view is subjective and not supported by evidence.

Jennett may believe that Kerr remained “defensive” about dismissing Gough Whitlam. But Whitlam remained defensive about attempting to govern without supply. And Fraser remained defensive about blocking supply in the sense that he attempted to avoid discussing the events of 11 November 1975. No mention of this in The Dismissal: 50 Years.

I note that, as the executive producer of Whitlam Dismissal : 50 Years, you regard the documentary “as a great piece of work by Greg”. Quelle Surprise! In fact it is profoundly unbalanced in that the Kerr antagonists/critics far outweigh the one supporter of the former governor-general. Namely Scott Ryan. I have analysed the program in tomorrow’s issue of my Media Watch Dog blog. Greg has a right of reply if he wishes.

Whitlam Dismissal: 50 Years is yet another example of the ABC’s lack of viewpoint diversity. Sky News managed to produce a balanced account of the Dismissal with its program The Dismissal: 50 Years On (presenter Chris Uhlmann, executive producer Richard Andrews). It heard equally from critics and supporters of the former governor-general – as well as impartial commentators.

Jennett’s account is supportive of Whitlam and hostile to Kerr – while letting Malcolm Fraser (who turned on Kerr) off-the-hook. But then, towards the end of his life, Fraser was loved by the left intelligentsia – and received standing ovations at literary festivals (of the kind much loved by ABC types) by one-time members of the “Shame Fraser, Shame” club.

Yours sincerely

Gerard Henderson

cc: Justin Stevens

Greg Jennett

 

* * * *

Until Next Time.

* * * *