Oh Malcolm, really? You say aggressive, we say effective - Women's Agenda

Oh Malcolm, really? You say aggressive, we say effective

Malcolm Turnbull. Andrew Bolt. The ABC. Bias. Leigh Sales. Emma Alberici. That particular combination hardly bodes well for a constructive conversation does it?

By now you may have read that yesterday morning the Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull described the post-Budget interviews by ABC anchors Emma Alberici and Leigh Sales as “very aggressive”. 

Speaking on Andrew Bolt’s television program he said:

“I would say as somebody who used to interview people as a living, both as a journalist and as a barrister and of course as a politician, I would say a more effective interviewing style is one that is less aggressive and more forensic,” he added.

Now there are many variables in his observations and to say they are loaded is an understatement. The context is relevant. Andrew Bolt was asking Turnbull, as he and many commentators of his ilk are obsessively wont to do, about the ABC’s “bias”.

Turnbull disagreed with the allegation of bias but did note the “aggressive” style of interview conducted by the ABC’s Sales and Alberici.

On Budget night neither Sales or Alberici gave their interview subjects, Joe Hockey and Matthias Cormann respectively, a free kick. In both interviews the reporters asked very specific questions and made attempts to ensure the ministers answered them accordingly.

Emma Alberici asked Matthias Cormann why $18 billion was considered a budget emergency and $35 billion isn’t.  He attempted to avoid this question three times and each time she bought him back to the question.

Would we call this aggressive or effective?

When we have politicians who routinely resort to “don’t fall for the Canberra inside rubbish” or “I’m not a commentator” or “let’s not get stuck playing word games”, in response to legitimate questions, it’s critical that interviewers hold them to account. 

It’s not surprising that politicians perhaps wish this weren’t the case but in a democracy like Australia, fortunately, that’s entirely irrelevant.

Aside from the efficacy of the journalists’ interviews, Malcolm Turnbull’s comments raise another question: if they were men would they be described as “aggressive”? 

George Negus spoke to Fairfax Media and said he seriously doubts he or Kerry O’Brien would be subject to such a description.  “What do they want, a series of Dorothy Dixers instead?

“I wonder whether he would say the same about … Kerry O’Brien, or me at a different time. What he really means is they don’t like being interviewed by them. Well, that means that they’re probably doing their job.”

Was Malcolm Turnbull being sexist? Almost certainly not intentionally but the fact remains that describing two of Australia’s most senior broadcasters who happen to be female as aggressive is sexist. Why? Because it’s a remark that isn’t made about male broadcasters, reporters or commentators.

Has he ever described Alan Jones or Ray Hadley or Kerry O’Brien or Laurie Oakes as aggressive? Not that I can find.  Why might that be?

×

Stay Smart! Get Savvy!

Get Women’s Agenda in your inbox