★★★★★ 0/5

Networks identify 13yo child at the centre of AFL racial abuse

Seven and ABC News pixellate the face of a 13 year old, but Nine and TEN do not.

17
Leave a comment

2013-05-26_1239TV networks reporting the racial abuse of AFL player Adam Goodes during the Indigenous round neglected to conceal the identity of the 13 year old girl involved.

Nine News and TEN News interviewed both mother and daughter but did not pixellate her face. Both Seven News and ABC News concealed her identity in reporting the story.

Similarly the Herald Sun did not pixellate her image while The Age did.

A TEN spokesperson told TV Tonight, “The mother was asked for her permission to identify the daughter on several occasions and over the course of some hours. The interview was conducted on the mother’s property and then the mother was interviewed.”

Nine News also aired the mother and daughter interview, but declined to comment to TV Tonight.

Seven showed the girl in the live AFL coverage, including replays at the end of the broadcast, but says it did not identify her in subsequent news reports at the request of the mother.

Yesterday the girl’s grandmother told 3AW the media had chased the family for interviews on the weekend.

“On the other stations her face was shown and Seven pixellated her face out but in all fairness I think that was too late because the cameras had honed in on her being dragged away on Friday evening and everybody could see,” she said.

“When we were in where the police were interviewing her the grandchildren were already receiving messages on their phones and photos were being sent with her at the game, circled. It was already on Facebook and everything.”

Adam Goodes has been widely praised for accepting an apology from the girl, who stressed she did not understand her comment was racially-based.

In an earlier press conference AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou warned media to handle the situation delicately.

“We have to be very conscious of the fact that this is a young girl,” he said.

The AFL would offer the family counselling and support.

The reporting and subsequent identifying of the girl must surely raise bigger questions about responsibilities of media to protect children, including those whose parents may not be media-savvy enough to understand the ramifications of consenting to an interview.

Yesterday camera-phone footage of a second AFL fan abusing players also emerged, but the man’s face was concealed in News bulletins.

Why was this not afforded to a child?

Updated.

17 Responses

  2. It just goes to show that the media cannot self regulate. It is agreed that the girl said the wrong thing but when I seen her taken away unsupervised without a parent by security, I was shocked. She has just turned 13 and to have to deal with the intense media scrutiny and social media backlash is very overwhelming for a girl of that age.

  3. Southpatt, except Adam Goodes. He’s been a model citizen in all this. If the girl & others in the community learn a lesson, then overall, it’s been a Good(es) thing.

  4. Interesting you note The Age pixelated her image, because they published her full name, so what’s the point. News Ltd papers put her face on the front page as well as publishing her name. It’s the publishing of her name that is the big problem, which doesn’t exactly relate to tv, but from a media point of view is something that needs to be looked at.

    The girl, but more so the girl’s mother came off looking worse following the interview. The girl just seemed to relay what Goodes told her, rather than actually understanding it for herself. And the mother relayed Goodes’ opinion that the girl didn’t know what she was saying, and she has no “concept of racism.” That statement sounded rehearsed and is BS, kids know right and wrong from a young age.

  5. I was really very impressed with how Goodes handled this situation. He responded with compassion and grace and I think his concern for the girl’s welfare is genuine.

    I also suspect that the chosen epithet may have had more to do with the girl’s perception of his hirsute appearance rather than his ethnicity, altho’ the timing is very unfortunate. This doesn’t excuse it but I think it does mitigate the racial aspect of the slur.

    Plus, she’s a kid – she needs education not persecution. I hope that she is allowed to get her life back on track and not have journalists camp outside her home or follow her to school for the next couple of weeks like that poor girl who had the fake collar bomb.

    1. 3AW interviewed the mother this morning but didn’t ask whether she consented to the daughter’s identity being revealed. Neil Mitchell also named the girl which I didn’t think was helpful.

      Seven had told me Weekend Sunrise did not identify her, so that’s disappointing.

  7. Interesting listening to Tony Jones on 3AW before – he was going on about how he felt for the 13 yr old girl – but Neil Mitchell didn’t ask him why 9 showed her face! Might have something to do with the fact Mitchell is paid by 9? He was quick to criticise over the Sandy Roberts Indian impersonation the other week.

  8. interesting thing is that “The St. Kilda Schoolgirl” had her face blurred by everyone until she turned 18 and gave permission. there seems to be no rules or consistency. I think the rule should be under 18’s get blurred unless clear permission is given otherwise.

  9. I was watching Sky News’s lunchtime bulletin on Saturday and her face was not pixellated; by the evening bulletin it had been. I thought that was odd, why not just pixelate from the start?

  10. @jezza tfoo

    When I hark back to the things I did at 13 I am amazed at how I am still here. A child’s mind at this age is not fully formed and common sense is usually having a vacation somewhere.

    This whole matter has been handled very badly by all parties.

  12. Channel 10 filmed the interview as part of a pool arrangement with 9. They aired it at 5pm. 9 then promoted it as an exclusive – complete with First on 9 strap in their updates. 7 also did an interview – but blurred the girl’s face – both the interview and also the incident off the coverage.

  13. I didn’t like seeing that young girl either. Channel TEN seemed to be promoting it as an exclusive.

    @Rudi I think only the back of that man was shown and they were asking for people to identify him.

  14. This is just a quagmire of all things wrong. 13yr old kids do know what is right and wrong, the parents …ugh, clearly the girl felt comfortable expressing her views, any time racial abuse is wrong and then to do it during Indigenous round = even worse, the media packs response….baad as usual.

    The only leadership, dignity and courage came from Adam Goodes, the bloke on the receiving end of the abuse

  15. Hi David, I was only half-watching, but I don’t think the man’s face was obscured when Seven showed that footage during the football on Sunday afternoon. (Happy to be corrected).

  16. Thanks for this story David. I felt uncomfortable with having this girl’s image on the front page of the Melbourne Herald-Sun yesterday. The hypocrisy of an opinion piece inside saying ‘we should not make her the poster child of racism’ was laughable. Pleas by the AFL and Adam Goodes himself to show care for the girl were clearly ignored.

Leave a Reply