ABC and SBS reject antisemitism envoy’s call for ‘oversight’ committee to vet Israel coverage
www.silverguide.site –
The ABC and SBS have defended their complaints processes and rejected the antisemitism envoy’s proposal for an external regulatory body, on a day of conflicting evidence at the royal commission.
The envoy, Jillian Segal, told the hearing on Thursday morning there was a “common and pervasive perception” in the Jewish community that the public broadcasters’ coverage of the war in the Middle East “lacked balance”, that there was an overemphasis on Gaza compared with other conflicts, and that the coverage gave disproportionate voice to anti-Israel perspectives.
She said she wanted a new “oversight” committee to vet their coverage.
But the ABC’s editorial director, Gavin Fang, said the broadcaster’s ombudsman was functioning effectively, along with the board and the Australian Communications and Media Authority (Acma).
“I’m not sure how another oversight body might function in addition to that existing oversight body, which already has the power to review and to examine the ABC’s content,” Fang said.
He also disagreed with Segal’s claim the coverage was disproportionate.
He told the inquiry the national broadcaster had covered the rise in antisemitism, and had a range of editorial policies that outlined “a series of principles or series of higher standards that public media is often held to and which we accept”.
The policies state the ABC must not unduly favour one perspective over another and must meet standards of impartiality, accuracy and fairness, he said.
The SBS ombudsman, Amy Stockwell, emphasised the independence of her role, the robustness of SBS’s complaints committee and the strength of Acma.
“It’s not a case of me marking my own homework. I mark somebody else’s homework, then the Acma marks mine,” she said.
Stockwell said the concept of an internal media ombudsman was well established internationally, and had been tested at SBS over the 21 years of its existence.
“It makes sense to have someone within the organisation but operating independently to make sure there’s a level of accountability and fidelity with audiences,” she said.
Segal said earlier the Jewish community felt reporting about the Middle East painted Israel “constantly in a negative light”.
Jewish Australians were almost more frustrated with Acma than with the ABC, Segal said.
She outlined how an independent regulator could give coverage a “tick” or “guidance” to broadcasters and spoke favourably of the media watchdog Ofcom’s role in the UK.
“[Ofcom] has powers to open their own investigations. They can look at a story and direct the BBC to take it down, to look at things differently. They can fine the BBC,” she said.
Ofcom’s website states that as of this month it has a new responsibility to “consider and give an opinion on whether the BBC has observed the relevant editorial guidelines in its online material”, but it has “no enforcement powers” for that material.
The ABC ombudsman, Fiona Cameron, told the inquiry the broadcaster received a “huge amount of organised campaigns where the complaints are identical, or similar” about the Middle East war.
From October 2023 to May 2026, her office settled 19,000 content complaints, of which 42% (8,000) were complaints about the ABC’s coverage of Israel and Gaza.
Cameron said an episode of Q&A after 7 October 2023 generated nearly 2,000 complaints that were “organised” and alleged the program was pro-Israel.
She said since then there was a definite trend towards campaigns complaining that coverage was pro-Palestine.
The ABC said in a statement this week that Middle East coverage generated more complaints than any other topic, but no complaints of bias in ABC News had been upheld by the ombudsman or investigated by Acma.
“In the six months July-December 2025, 51% of complaints claimed the ABC’s Israel-Gaza coverage was broadly pro-Palestinian and 47% claimed it was broadly pro-Israel,” the statement said.
“This indicates that perceptions of bias are arising from strongly held views across the community rather than systematic editorial favouritism.”
The ombudsman had found five breaches of editorial standards.
The commissioner, Virginia Bell, asked Segal how a committee that included people with a particular “bandwagon” would affect people’s trust in the ABC’s independence. Segal said the committee could be appointed without a Jewish representative as long as the members understood antisemitism.
Both the ABC and SBS have chosen not to use the contested International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which the royal commission is using.
The ABC said adopting the contested definition could conflict with perceptions of its independence, and SBS said it did not adopt definitions formulated by third parties.
‘Bad mistake’
As an example of problematic coverage, Segal pointed to a mistake in an ABC report that “14,000 babies that will die in the next 48 hours” in Gaza unless aid could reach them. That report was based on a UN spokesperson speaking to the BBC, and should have reported that 14,000 babies would die in the next year.
The BBC had issued a correction to the story before the ABC went to air. The ABC later corrected its own reporting.
Segal said it took too long to correct, that the correction had less prominence than the original story, and that it should have been checked before being aired.
“It was a bad mistake,” Fang said.
He said the ABC had a transparent corrections and clarifications policy, and its approach was to attempt to correct errors at the first opportunity.
“Sometimes we don’t achieve that, because we’re attempting to ensure we fully understand what the issue might have been,” he said.
Segal also criticised SBS for using the Gaza health ministry as an official source of statistics, which she described as “grossly inflated”.
Israel has accepted the ministry’s estimate that the death toll is more than 70,000 is broadly accurate.
The broadcaster’s news and current affairs director, Amanda Wicks, said it didn’t always refer to Hamas running the ministry, but made clear Hamas was in charge in Gaza.
SBS’s role is to “shine a light on … racism and discrimination, prejudice in all its forms”, including reporting on antisemitic attacks, Wicks said.
Segal said there was more focus on Israel’s behaviour than that of Hamas, and the reporting of Israel’s actions in Gaza had led to antisemitism in Australia.
“If Israel has misconducted itself, then accurate reporting, it is what it is. But if the reporting is not accurate, then I think the broadcaster has some responsibility and that’s what I’m dealing with.”
Comment