Australia’s national public broadcaster defended its reporting on the Israel-Hamas war while rejecting calls to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism during testimony before a national inquiry examining antisemitism and social cohesion.
The issue arose Thursday as Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) Editorial Director Gavin Fang appeared before Australia’s Royal Commission into Anti-Semitism and Social Cohesion, which was established following a rise in antisemitic incidents across the country.
During the hearing, Fang said the ABC believes its existing editorial standards, anti-racism policies and internal guidelines are sufficient to address antisemitism and maintain balanced journalism.
He argued that formally adopting the IHRA working definition could create concerns about the broadcaster’s editorial independence.
The IHRA definition has been adopted by numerous governments and organizations worldwide, including the Australian government, and includes examples of antisemitic conduct related to Jewish identity and, in certain circumstances, criticism of Israel.
Fang described the definition as “contested” and maintained that the ABC’s existing editorial framework already provides appropriate guidance for journalists.
The broadcaster’s position drew criticism during the inquiry.
Australia’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, Jillian Segal, testified that many members of Australia’s Jewish community believe the ABC’s reporting has disproportionately focused on Gaza while presenting coverage they consider unfair toward Israel.
Segal questioned why the broadcaster had adopted formal editorial standards addressing issues such as harassment and genocide but had declined to adopt a recognized definition of antisemitism.
She also proposed creating an independent oversight body to review complaints involving coverage of the Middle East rather than relying solely on the broadcaster’s own internal review process.
During questioning, Fang acknowledged one significant editorial mistake involving the ABC’s reporting of claims about humanitarian conditions in Gaza during 2025.
He said the broadcaster should have corrected inaccurate information more quickly after later evidence demonstrated the original reporting was incorrect.
However, Fang rejected broader allegations that the ABC systematically favors one side in its Middle East coverage.
He noted that complaints received by the broadcaster are roughly divided between viewers who believe coverage is too favorable toward Israel and those who believe it is too critical of Israel.
The ABC also submitted a written statement maintaining that its journalism remains evidence-based, impartial and fully consistent with its public broadcasting responsibilities.
The broadcaster said no formal findings of systemic editorial bias regarding its Middle East reporting have been upheld by its internal ombudsman.
The inquiry also heard testimony from representatives of Australia’s multicultural broadcaster SBS, which likewise defended its editorial practices while condemning antisemitism.
The commission forms part of Australia’s broader effort to address rising antisemitism following increased tensions surrounding the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Beyond examining public broadcasters, the inquiry has also reviewed social media platforms, online hate speech, community safety and the spread of antisemitic content across digital platforms.
For media organizations, the proceedings highlight growing scrutiny over how major news organizations report on highly polarizing international conflicts while balancing editorial independence with public confidence.
The inquiry may ultimately recommend additional oversight mechanisms or policy changes affecting publicly funded media organizations.
For businesses, the hearings also underscore the broader reputational and governance challenges facing media companies operating in an increasingly polarized information environment where questions surrounding trust, transparency and editorial standards continue attracting greater public attention.
The Royal Commission is expected to continue hearing testimony from government officials, community leaders, media organizations and academic experts before issuing its final recommendations.
JBizNews Desk | Sydney
© JBizNews.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or Distribution without Written Permission is Prohibited.
