ABC and SBS need ‘oversight’ committee to vet Israel coverage, Jillian Segal tells royal commission

Jillian Segal, Australia's antisemitism envoy, has called for an independent oversight committee to scrutinize the coverage of Israel by public broadcasters ABC and SBS. Speaking at a royal commission on Thursday, Segal argued that such a committee, external to the organizations, is necessary to address a "common and pervasive perception" within the Jewish community. This perception, she explained, is that the broadcasters' reporting on the Middle East war lacks balance, overemphasizes Gaza compared to other conflicts, and gives disproportionate voice to anti-Israel viewpoints.

“

a committee outside the organisation should have oversight

The ABC's editorial director, Gavin Fang, defended the national broadcaster's reporting, stating that it adheres to a range of editorial policies emphasizing impartiality, accuracy, and fairness. He noted that the ABC takes audience feedback into account and would consider Segal's concerns. The ABC also stated that Middle East coverage generates more complaints than any other topic, but that no complaints of bias in its news reporting have been upheld by its ombudsman or investigated by the Australian Media and Communications Authority (Acma).

“

lacked balance

Segal drew a parallel with the UK's media watchdog, Ofcom, suggesting a similar model where an independent regulator could "tick" or provide "guidance" to broadcasters. She noted Ofcom's powers to investigate and potentially direct the BBC to review content or even impose fines, although Ofcom's current powers for online material are limited to issuing opinions without enforcement. Jewish Australians, Segal added, are often more frustrated with existing watchdogs like Acma than with the ABC itself. The ABC's statement indicated that complaint statistics show a near-even split between those perceiving coverage as pro-Palestinian and those seeing it as pro-Israel, suggesting perceptions of bias stem from strongly held community views rather than systematic editorial favoritism.

“

gave disproportionate voice to anti-Israel perspectives