GERARD HENDERSON’S MEDIA WATCH DOG

ISSUE – NO. 766

13 March 2026

* * * *

* * * *

THE LATEST

  • Sydney Morning Herald’s Letters Page prints 12 out of 12 letters that attack Senator Matt Canavan

Like The Age in Melbourne, the Sydney Morning Herald proclaims each morning that it is “Independent. Always.”

On 7 March, Jordan Baker – the SMH’s new editor – wrote an article titled “Our new editor’s pledge to readers”. It commenced as follows:

Next month, The Sydney Morning Herald will turn 195. It is the oldest continuously published newspaper in Australia. For almost 200 years, it has played a crucial role in this country’s evolution − as witness, investigator and conscience. Back in 1831, the first editorial of the paper…contained a pledge that it would be balanced (“we have no wish to mislead; no interest to gratify by unsparing abuse or indiscriminate approbation”) and would be conducted according to the principles of “candour, honesty and honour”.

Then towards the end of her article Ms Baker declared:

The Herald stands for balance, rigour and evidence in an increasingly polarised world. We, like you, value nuance and curiosity over simplicity and certainty. We publish different perspectives because we believe civilised debate is essential to a healthy democracy. We will stick to these principles because we know that our readers are educated, intelligent and will use our reporting and analysis to make up their own minds.

So, how’s all that going then – for nuance, balance and all that stuff? You be the judge. On Friday 13 March the SMH’s Letters Page was headed “Matt Canavan as leader? The joke is on the Nationals now”. The reference was the decision of the Nationals party room to elect Matt Canavan as its leader this week.

Under this title, the SMH’s letters editor published a total of 12 letters. All of which attacked Matt Canavan – quite a few of which were of the sneering kind while others were hyperbolic.

The first, from Howard Charles in Annandale compared the danger to Australia of climate change with the threat posed by a victory of the Nazi-Fascist Axis powers in the Second World War. He accused Senator Canavan for his defence of fossil fuels and steadfast opposition to renewables. The Nationals leader is not opposed to renewables. While Patrick McGrath of Potts Point compared Canavan with the comedian Abbott of Abbott and Costello fame.

Then Mokhles Sidden of South Strathfield had this to say:

Matt Canavan is elected Nationals leader and calls for “more Australian babies, more Australian everything”. I agree. I, personally, need more yachts, jet skis, more apartments by the water, more cars, more motorbikes, more travel and more wives, please. The question is: how? Unless he is going to give every Australian a gift of $5 million?

Mokhles Sidden, South Strathfield

How did the Letters Editor decide to publish such trivia? Rightly or wrongly, Senator Canavan wants Australia to have more industries and more Australian-born children. What’s wrong with that? As to the “more wives” comment. Well, that gives hyperbole a bad name.

And yet the SMH’s editor reckons that her newspaper “stands for balance”. Which raises the question: Does the SMH’s editor read the SMH?

  • Sally Sara lets Greens Senator David Shoebridge call the US/Israel-Iran conflict an “illegal war” on 14 occasions without challenge

On Wednesday 11 March, Sally Sara was in the ABC Radio National Breakfast presenter’s chair. She interviewed David Shoebridge, the Greens Party senator for NSW.

Comrade Sara commenced by asking Senator Shoebridge twice whether Australia is justified in responding to the United Arab Emirates’ “call for help” to defend itself from attack by Iran’s missiles and drones. The answer was in the negative and, on two occasions, the Greens Party’s spokesman for foreign affairs and defence said so – declaring the United States/Israel attack on Iran was a “plainly illegal war”.

Shoebridge went on to state that the US/Israel action was an illegal war on an additional 12 occasions – making it 14 in all. Listen here as the Greens Senator says the same thing over and over again.

And did Comrade Sara contest the Greens Party senator’s assertion? Not on your nelly. It would seem that RN Breakfast presenters are prepared to allege that an Israeli ambassador is lying but unwilling to cross-examine a leftist politician about his undocumented assertion. Re which see the next segment. Let’s go to the transcript where the Sara/Shoebridge exchange concludes:

David Shoebridge: What’s happening now is an inevitable consequence of an illegal war that was supported by – I call them the war parties, Labor, the Coalition and One Nation in the federal parliament, and is playing out as you would expect.

Sally Sara: Changes to the migration act….

Not only did Comrade Sara fail to contest the Greens Party senator when he kept on repeating that this was an illegal war. But the RN Breakfast presenter also said nothing when Shoebridge declared that Labor, the Coalition and One Nation are “war parties”. How’s that for a soft interview? And here’s another question: Can You Bear It?

  • RN Breakfast fails to correct Melissa Clarke’s false claim about Israel’s Ambassador to Australia

As avid Media Watch Dog readers will recall, on Friday 6 March Melissa Clarke (who was standing in for Sally Sara) interviewed Hillel Newman – the recently appointed Israeli ambassador to Australia. At the end of the interview, Comrade Clarke effectively cross-examined the ambassador about the recent bombing of a school in Iran.

Initially Clarke declared: “You can’t tell us that it wasn’t a result of Israeli or US strikes?” Then she suggested that the ambassador knew that Israel had dropped “a particular bomb on a particular location”. Then the ABC presenter asserted that Hillel Newman would know all about the actions of the Israeli Defense Forces.

Clarke, in activist journalist mode, made it clear that she did not believe the Israeli ambassador. It turns out that it is probable that the school was bombed in error by the US Air Force. If this is the case, this was a terrible mistake. However, there is no evidence to support Melissa Clarke’s assertion that the IDF was responsible or that the Israeli ambassador to Australia was covering up. Moreover, RN Breakfast has not corrected Melissa Clarke’s false claim.

It was yet another example of an ABC journalist at the taxpayer funded public broadcaster in activist mode. Can You Bear It?

  • Peter Hartcher’s claim that the Australian government does not care if International law is broken is not contested on Insiders

Nine’s Peter Hartcher, the international editor of The Age and Sydney Morning Herald, is a journalist of the somewhat pompous kind. Your man Hartcher tends to talk with authority or a sense of self-assurance. That’s why – when he is a panellist on ABC TV’s Insiders program – his views are rarely challenged.

Let’s go to the transcript of Insiders on Sunday when discussion turned on the legality of the United States’ military attack on Iran:

Peter Hartcher: Could I just observe that Australia has never had any problem with international law being broken, as long as it’s by an ally. We had no problem with the Iraq War, the Vietnam War, both illegal.

David Speers: Labor did though, back in 2003.

Anabel Crabb: Anthony Albanese did. He said it was.

Peter Hartcher: Yeah, but the governments of the day, the governments of the day, not only defended those American actions, but we sent troops to join them. So that’s the critical issue. Australia, like the US, has been selective in where we’ve sought to apply international law. But also, as Sam [Maiden] said, this is a regime that’s exported terrorism to Australian soil and to try to divide our society. The government really need not mourn this outfit.

David Speers: Exactly. Well, time to talk now to the foreign minister, Penny Wong.

Insiders, presenter David Speers did not contest your man Hartcher’s unequivocal claim that Australia’s military commitments in Vietnam, and later Iraq was a breach of international law. He should have.

Both the United States and Australia, at the request of the non-communist government of South Vietnam, supported South Vietnam’s defence against communist North Vietnam. In the end, Hanoi conquered Saigon. But Hartcher provided no evidence that the US or Australia engaged in an illegal war between 1965 and 1971 when Australian military forces were in South Vietnam.

And what about Hartcher’s claim that both the Iraq War and the US/Israel attack on Iran are illegal? Well he provided no evidence.

What Peter Hartcher failed to concede on 8 March was that the issue over whether the attack on Iran is illegal is contested. Writing in Nine’s Australian Financial Review on 9 March, Professor Greg Rose and Anthony Bergin wrote that claims that the US/Israel military action against Iran is illegal “are risible”.

At the very least, Hartcher’s view of international law is contested. But David Speers did not draw this to the attention of Insiders’ viewers. Can You Bear It?

EDITORIAL

  • Louise Milligan nominated for Quill Award for vile & unproven allegation against the late Cardinal George Pell

Louise Milligan has been nominated in the Melbourne Press Club’s 31st Quill Awards in Print Media Feature Writing section. The article was titled “The True Legacy of the Rapist George Pell” and was published in February 2025 edition of The Monthly. This despite the fact that it led to a contempt of court action and the magazine had to be withdrawn from sale in Victoria.

This article never could have been published when Cardinal George Pell was alive. He was never convicted of rape and, consequently, cannot accurately be described as a rapist.

In her Monthly article, Milligan refers to confidential documents with respect to two decisions made by the National Redress Scheme for people who have experienced institutional child sexual abuse. This is the organisation administered by the Commonwealth Department of Social Services. Its decision makers are anonymous and do not necessarily have expertise in criminal law.

Moreover, findings are made according to the “reasonable likelihood” that a sexual assault took place. This is below the burden of proof in criminal or civil cases. The persons accused do not get a hearing. Yet, on the basis of an opponent’s access to protected information, Milligan – with the apparent consent of the ABC and The Monthly – accused a person of vile crimes. Moreover, The Monthly article contains an allegation about a woman who was later cleared of an offense in a NSW court.

Media Watch Dog will cover this matter in detail in the next issue.

Media Watch Dog’s Five Paws Award was inaugurated in Issue Number 26 (4 September 2009) during the time of Nancy (2004-2017). The first winner was ABC TV presenter Emma Alberici. Ms Alberici scored for remembering the Nazi-Soviet Pact of 23 August 1939 whereby Hitler and Stalin divided Eastern Europe between Germany and the Soviet Union. And for stating that the Nazi-Soviet Pact had effectively started the Second World War, since it was immediately followed by Germany’s invasion of Poland from the West (at a time when the Soviet Union had become an ally of Germany). Soon after, the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the East. Over the years, the late Nancy’s Five Paws Award has become one of the world’s most prestigious gongs – rating just below the Nobel Prize and the Academy Awards.

  • Samantha Maiden scores for dismissing Annabel Crabb’s naïvety

Wasn’t it great to see Annabel Crabb back on the ABC TV Insiders couch last Sunday? David Speers was in the presenter’s chair – the other panellists were Samantha Maiden (news.com) and Peter Hartcher (Nine newspapers).

Early on, Comrade Crabb criticised Opposition shadow minister Tim Wilson for being too expressive in throwing his hands around in the House of Representatives while he attempted to sing a song criticising treasurer Jim Chalmers for the level of inflation. But Crabb’s Insiders performance was replete with hand gestures. Let’s go to the transcript when Ms Crabb attempts to make sense of Australia’s position on the Iran War.

David Speers: The thing that jumped out to me, though, is Australia is considering offering military support for Gulf States being hit by Iran’s drones and missiles. Not boots on the ground, Annabel. But that’s a significant development.

Annabel Crabb: Yeah, it really is. And I think every conflict always reaches a point of sophistry, where with a definitional kind of impermeability. And this one seems to be the difference between offensive and defensive. So, Penny Wong said about a million times during that interview, “You know, our position is that we are not undergoing or participating in any offensive action”. Now, this apparently extends to three Australian Defence Force members being on a submarine that sinks another boat. But we weren’t involved in the offensive elements of that, I mean –

David Speers: So, they’re having a cup of tea in the tearoom?

Annabel Crabb: Presumably, there’s a work to rule situation where, I don’t know, but this is the, this is where that definitional difference becomes extremely hazy, right? Because it’s a bar brawl over there, right? There’s ordnance flying everywhere. Iran’s attacking its neighbours and allies. How do you tell the difference between what’s offensive and defensive in a very kinetic situation?

Samantha Maiden: Logistically, it might be a little difficult to get off the submarine though, David.

A somewhat confused performance, right? (to use a Crabb affirmative question). What with such words as “sophistry”, “impermeability” plus the references to “about a million times” and “a very kinetic situation”, would viewers know what she was on about?

Just as well the zany Ms Maiden was listening enough to make the point that it would have been a little difficult for the three Australian submariners on the United States submarine to get off it in the middle of the ocean. Good point.

Samantha Maiden: Five Paws.

Annabel Crabb makes a two-handed kinetic point on Insiders

Since the ABC TV’s Media Watch program commenced in 1989 it has consisted of presenters laying down the (media behaviour) law as if they were a modern-day Moses descending from the mountain, commandments in hand. All of them have been left-of-centre types as befits a Conservative Free Zone. In over three decades, the taxpayer funded media “czar” has never had a conservative presenter.

  • It’s left-of-centre “mates rates” as ABC’s Linton Besser does not report a Labor Party senator’s criticism of ABC heavy John Lyons – but focuses on Kyle & Jackie O

Without question, the BIG NEWS in the media in recent times has turned on the reporting of the United States/Israel conflict with Iran – with respect to military action and the domestic debate.

Linton Besser and his 10-person team at the taxpayer funded public broadcaster’s Media Watch are invariably criticising journalists for what, in media jargon, is called missing the lede. That is, avoiding big stories for less important matters or, indeed, trivia.

So, how is Comrade Besser and the ABC TV Media Watch Team going? – Ellie’s (male) co-owner hears avid readers cry. Not too well, it seems – but you be the judge.

On Monday 9 March, Comrade Besser and Media Watch’s Gang of 10 led with a story titled “Bots of War”. It was about misinformation on social media platforms like X which are often fuelled by AI or programmed applications – leading to “a flood of fake videos, fake photos and fake facts” of relevance to the war. A worthy story – but hardly news. [BTW, what is the definition of a “fake fact”? – MWD Editor.]

Then Comrade Besser moved to a subject titled “Radio bust-up” – all about the break-up of KIIS FM breakfast show starring Kyle Sandilands and Jackie “O” Henderson (no relation). The whole segment ran for 7.33 minutes (out of a 15-minute program) examining the Australian media’s obsessive coverage of the story. At one stage Besser declared: “Even us latte-sippers at the ABC were forced to acknowledge the earthquake.”

What a load of absolute tosh. No one forces the taxpayer funded public broadcaster to acknowledge anything – since it is not dependent on ratings and advertisers. Moreover, a row between two vulgar overpaid shock-jocks is hardly an earthquake.

For the final segment titled “Fake family”, Comrade Besser drew on an old story about The Telegraph in London – which had been conned into running a story into how a couple in England could allegedly not live on £350,000 a year. Here’s what Linton Besser had to say, in a sneering tone:

Yes those communists on Downing Street punishing ambition, penalising aspiration! By removing a tax exemption for private school fees. And it couldn’t happen to a more undeserving family. There’s Al, the dad, and Alexandra, the mum, and two of their three happy children Ali, Harry and Barry. Scroll down and there’s another lovely picture of, hang on, are they the same kids? Answer, no. Because these are not in fact photographs of Ali, Harry, or little Barry Moy. But 12-year-old stock images, available for purchase online.

When this oopsie was first identified The Telegraph swung into action expunging the story and 19 days later acknowledging to readers: … we published an online article … which included stock photographs and not, as the article indicated, images of the family referred to in the article. – The Telegraph UK, 18 June, 2025

Turn it up. For starters, Comrade Besser mocked private schools – without advising that – you’ve guessed it – he went to a PRIVATE SCHOOL. Moreover, the only justification for running this (old) story was that The Telegraph corrected a number of errors on 2 March 2026. How lazy is that?

Meanwhile, Linton Besser and the “Gang of 10” did not cover the big domestic media story of the week. Namely, John Lyons – the ABC Americas Editor – accusing the Albanese government of engaging in “misinterpretation” and “propaganda” concerning its case of why Australia should support the US action against Iran. In other words, Comrade Lyons is an activist journalist.

Victorian Labor Party Senator Raff Ciccone addressed the Senate on 4 March. He did not mention ABC Americas Editor’s name – but he was clearly referring to John Lyons when he made this comment:

When the United States and Israel act to prevent this regime from acquiring nuclear weapons, we must understand what is at stake. A nuclear armed Islamic Iranian regime would embolden repression at home and aggression abroad and threaten global security. Preventing that outcome is important. Yet we have seen this week from the Australian Greens and prominent voices a rush to condemn Australia for supporting action, claiming international law has been violated. This is the same international law that has allowed Iranian backed terrorism to destabilise not just the region but also the world for over 40 years. This was the same international law that was silent as tens of thousands of civilians were murdered by their own government just a few weeks ago. [Emphasis added].

The same voices that routinely slam the failures of international law elsewhere in the region are now ignoring its failure of the Iranian people. This is naked hypocrisy that undermines our nation and its values. These voices constantly ignore the horrific nature of the Islamic Iranian regime. They seize every opportunity to criticise our allies rather than confront this reality. Some have even branded the Prime Minister’s words as “political propaganda”. This is an extraordinary claim, as if standing with women beaten in the streets is propaganda, as if opposing the execution of protesters is propaganda, as if resisting nuclear blackmail is propaganda. If this is the case, then we have lost our moral compass….

So there you have it. A Labor senator said that anyone suggesting that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was into “political propaganda” in this instance had lost their “moral compass”. The term “propaganda” was used by John Lyons – clearly he was the “prominent” voice to whom Senator Ciccone referred. It should be media news when a Labor senator attacks the ABC Americas Editor John Lyons – one of the most influential operators inside the taxpayer funded public broadcaster.

And what did Linton Besser say about this? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Instead ABC TV’s “Gang of Ten” focused on Kyle and Jackie O. Really.

[Perhaps you should have run this in your hugely popular Can You Bear It? segment. Just a thought. – MWD Editor.]

AN AMY REMEIKIS MOMENT

  • No written kisses for John Howard as Amy Remeikis fires at the former PM in her new book

As avid readers are aware, MWD is a fan of Amy Remeikis – formerly a wage slave at the leftist Guardian Australia (at a time when Lenore Taylor was its editor). Comrade Remeikis is now the chief political analyst at the avowedly leftist Australia Institute based in Canberra (where Ellie was a rescue dog before she was saved by her co-owners).

Before Comrade Remeikis decamped for The Australia Institute, Ellie’s (male) co-owner campaigned for her to get a pay rise in her previously low-paying employ at The Guardian Australia. But, alas, without success.

As part of his ongoing “Give Amy a Financial Chance” campaign, Hendo decided to buy a copy of her just-released book which has the title Where It All Went Wrong: The Case Against John Howard. Quelle Surprise! He noticed this at the Constant Reader in Sydney’s Crows Nest – observing that the bookshop was offering an autographed copy for sale. [Would this increase or decrease a second-hand sale? I wonder. – MWD Editor.]

Opening the said tome, Hendo noted that Comrade Remeikis had written this “What a time, huh? So much of it is this man’s [i.e. John Howard’s] fault”. This was followed by an illegible signature plus “xx”. That is, two (written) kisses.

It would seem that The Australia Institute’s ideologue and her publisher Simon & Schuster assume that only John Howard’s political enemies will buy her book. For this is how the book’s Acknowledgements section concludes:

And to anyone who wants something better, who feels left behind, frustrated, angry and motivated. You matter. We know what the problems are. Here’s to solving them. A x

How about that? Another written kiss. Readers (if readers there are) will be so lucky.

In the Acknowledgements, the author also cites no fewer than 57 names (including cats Stevie and George who are described as “kittahns’’). Here’s her little list:

Ben Ball, Shannon Grey, Issac, Glenn, Alice, Skye, Morgan, Polly, Jack, Grogs, Matt, Frank, Elinor, Josh, Dave, Allan, Emma, Rod, Angus, Stephen, Dee, Kathy, Emily, Hannah, Alison, Pamela, Drij, Richard, Leanne, Anna, Ebony, Blythe, Yvonne, Sarah, Tegan, Sala, Anna, Nathanael, Amy, Belinda, Jan, Steph, Paul, Dan, Mikey, Sally, Nadine, Katrina, Vanessa, Laura, Murph, Ellen, Niki, Stevie (kittahn), George (kittahn), Gareth, Wolf.

Which raises the question – who might the likes of Laura, Murph and Niki be? Avid readers are invited to make suggestions for next week’s issue.

MWD will cover Where It All Went Wrong next week. In the meantime, in The Weekend Australian on 14-15 March, Gerard Henderson has revealed a significant howler where Comrade Remeikis went wrong in downplaying John Howard’s electoral successes. Stay tuned – s’il vous plait.

Verily, An Amy Remeikis Moment.

YOUR TAXES AT WORK

This hugely popular Media Watch Dog segment looks at how taxpayers’ money is spent by governments and councils – along with the various institutions they fund. Of particular interest to Gerard Henderson – a published author who never gets invited to literary festivals, which obviates the need for him to respond to any literary festival RSVP in a negative way – are the various taxpayer funded writers’ festivals.

MWD defines a literary festival as an occasion when a soviet of leftist activists

and bureaucrats gets hold of a bucket load of taxpayer funds and invites members of the leftist intelligentsia to rock up to festivals (speakers’ fees, travel and accommodation costs all paid). There they meet fellow panellists of like mind and participate in forums in which almost everyone agrees with almost everyone else in a leftist kind of way on almost everything. Boring to be sure, but the left intelligentsia, for the most part, do not want to hear opposing views.

Each year, MWD focuses on various writers’ festivals – in particular, the taxpayer funded get-togethers in Adelaide, Canberra, Melbourne, Newcastle and Sydney.

  • The 2026 Sydney Writers’ Festival – yet another (taxpayer funded) leftist stack

On 9 March Ann Mossop, artistic director of the 2026 Sydney Writers’ Festival, put out a meaningless statement titled “Show Me the Truth” which commenced: “The theme of the Festival, ‘Show Me the Truth’, is an invitation to engage with the many ways writers bring the truth to life.”

How delusional can a director of a writers’ festival get? The 2026 SWF is only focused on a left-of-centre “truth”. Here’s a list of performers (not all of whom are writers) in the non-fiction segment of the 2026 festival:

Tony Abbott, Randa Abdel-Fattah, Waleed Aly, Jacinda Ardern, Troy Bramston, Jane Caro, Annabel Crabb, Geraldine Doogue, Jo Dyer, Anton Enus, Jan Fran, Anna Funder, A.C. Grayling, Nour Haydar, Narelda Jacobs, Erik Jensen, Fran Kelly, Sean Kelly, Antoinette Lattouf, Benjamin Law, Antony Loewenstein, Jacqueline Maley, David Marr, Kate McClymont, Bruce Pascoe, Amy Remeikis, Henry Reynolds, Niki Savva, Greg Sheridan, Yumi Stynes, Michael Williams, Clare Wright.

Hardly a political conservative among this lot – although not all are leftists. Sure, there are two political conservatives on the speakers list – Tony Abbott (who will discuss his book A History of Australia) and Greg Sheridan (who will discuss How Christians Can Succeed Today). Sheridan will also take part in a panel on hate speech with, among others, such left of centre types as Comrades Aly and Lattouf. But neither Abbott nor Sheridan is scheduled to talk about international or national politics.

And what about Israel/Gaza and Australian national politics – MWD hears avid readers cry. Well, check out the two sessions listed below:

• Silenced

A critical dialogue about the things we aren’t allowed to say, but do. Saturday 23 May 2026

Discipline by Randa Abdel-Fattah. Women Who Win by Antoinette Lattouf. Bugger by Michael Mohammed Ahmad. Three outspoken new books which each explore themes of censorship, silencing and resilience in the face of turmoil, heartbreak and hardship. In this rare and captivating dialogue, three of Australia’s most celebrated authors from the Palestinian and Lebanese diaspora expose the challenges they’ve each faced in speaking truth to power and unpack the gut-wrenching truths at the core of their latest works. Facilitated by one of Australia’s most dynamic and forthright journalists working today, Jan Fran, this event promises to be a cornerstone moment in the history of Arab Australian literary expression.

How about that? Comrades Abdel-Fattah, Lattouf, Ahmad and Fran are all vehement critics of Israel. They have top billing at a taxpayer-funded literary festival telling an audience what they are not allowed to say. Really. No other view will be heard – in the SWF’s so-called search for “truth”.

Then there is this:

• What We Know About Gaza

Understanding the devastation of Gaza and what the future holds. Sunday 24 May

More than two years into the war on Gaza, mass loss of life continues and a solution remains elusive. Although the war in Gaza has been livestreamed on social media, international journalists were kept out and Palestinian journalists reporting on the war have been killed in record numbers. Palestinian policy analyst and writer Tareq Baconi (Fire in Every Direction) and Australian journalist Antony Loewenstein (The Palestine Laboratory) bring a wealth of knowledge to understanding what has happened in Gaza and share their perspectives on the war, its impacts and the international stakes at play. Hear Tareq and Antony discuss the present and future for Gaza with journalist Nour Haydar.

Comrades Baconi, Loewenstein and Haydar are all vehement critics of contemporary Israel. No other view will be heard – in the SWF’s search for so-called “truth”.

And then there is this:

• Barrie Cassidy and Friends: State of the Nation. The substance behind the spin with Australia’s leading political journalists. Saturday 23 May 2026

The mainstay event in the Sydney Writers’ Festival program and the Australian political calendar returns. Festival favourite and renowned political analyst Barrie Cassidy returns with his professional pals to review a year of international negotiations, widespread protest, renewed economic and environmental crises and a slew of new policy decisions. Get the experts’ opinions with writer and broadcaster Waleed Aly, award-winning columnist Sean Kelly, chief political analyst at The Australia Institute Amy Remeikis and acclaimed political writer Niki Savva. In conversation with host Barrie Cassidy.

Barrie Cassidy’s forum reflects the ABC for which he worked – in that it’s a Conservative Free Zone. Comrade Cassidy is a former Labor Party staffer, Comrade Aly is a left-of-centre academic, Comrade Kelly is a former political staffer to both Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard [Quite an achievement, to be sure. – MWD Editor], Comrade Remeikis is a former Guardian Australia journalist who now works for the avowedly leftist Australia Institute and Comrade Savva is a vehement critic of the contemporary Liberal Party. No alternative viewpoint will be heard. Enough said.

By the way, here’s a case where you can judge a book by its cover. Amy Remeikis has just written a book titled Where It All Went Wrong: The Case Against John Howard (Scribner, 2026).

Amy Remeikis Where it all went wrong book cover

* * * * *

Ann Mossop was reported in the Sydney Morning Herald on 11 March as stating: “We all have an understanding of truth in our daily lives but the moment you go beyond that layers of uncertainty come into play.” Turn it up. There is scant uncertainty at the 2026 Sydney Writers’ Festival. It’s yet another taxpayer funded leftist stack.

****

Until Next Time

****