ABC defends Four Corners crew attending protest
"Just prior to the action the team received a tip to go to an address," says ABC.
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News
The ABC has defended the presence of a Four Corners team at protest action outside the home of Woodside energy CEO Meg O’Neill in Perth.
Communications Minister Michelle Rowland says the behaviour of protesters this week was “completely unacceptable” and was seeking “detailed commentary” on ABC’s attendance.
Rowland said the ABC had confirmed a television crew was present to film the protest for an upcoming documentary, but they had “no knowledge of the nature of the behaviour that would occur”.
ABC confirmed a Four Corners team attended the protest action to gather material for a potential report later this year.
“Just prior to the action the team received a tip to go to an address, they had no knowledge what was at the address or that it was someone’s house,” ABC said in a statement.
“They had no knowledge of what action was going to occur there. When they arrived the police were already in attendance, in numbers.
“The ABC team remained on public land observing what was happening and getting some vision, as journalists do.
“They at no time went on to private property or had any involvement in what was happening. The ABC team in no way colluded with the activists.”
Share
- Tagged with Four Corners
11 Responses
If it has anything to do with climate change you can expect ABC News to be there, and the Burrup Hub gas project is an obvious attraction for a potential headline, so in my opinion you can safely say this TV crew knew what they were doing being outside the home of Woodside CEO Meg O’Neill’s home. Interestingly Woodside is threatening to sue two climate protesters for financial loss after releasing stench gas inside its Perth HQ, forcing the evacuation of all staff. Like the Just Stop Oil protesters in the UK, this form of activism is designed to be publicly disruptive or cause some superficial damage, and mostly they are allowed to get away with it.
“I think you’ve indicated in the past working at ABC, but yes they were already in Perth preparing story.”
Preparing what story, I think you’ve missed out a “the ” or “a” in your reply.
4 Corners story.
An address which was a private residence which would be a privacy violation for them to film. The crew had probably been in Perth for some time, acting as a free PR division for Greenpeace.
… so let’s see … 4 Corners is based in Ultimo … the demonstration was in Perth … so “just prior to the action” the 4 Corners Ultimo “team received a tip to go to an address” in Perth, booked flights, drove to the airport, jumped on a plane, flew for five hours, grabbed a taxi at the airport and still got there in time for the protest? Hmmmmm …
I think you’ve indicated in the past working at ABC, but yes they were already in Perth preparing story.
… ah, so you’re saying that the protesters knew that 4 Corners were in town so staged the protest at a private home just for the benefit of the story, making sure to let the 4 Corners team know in advance so the cameras would be there … yep, that makes sense in a wacko sort of way …
I answered your query and said no such thing, kindly stop twisting words.
Just to be clear…..My reply is in reference to CJ. and it’s not the first time either I’ve noticed similar in the past…
You’ve made your point…try to move on…it makes for uncomfortable reading.
“Just prior to the action the team received a tip to go to an address…”.
They were already in Perth, perhaps in the ABC centre there. Perhaps “the tip” came from the ABC newsroom in Perth. It sounds like they covered it like all other broadcast media. What’s the thing that has Rowland twisting her pearls?