Latest / The Front / The ABC’s Sentient scandal: Sarah Ferguson’s documentary drama

Transcript

The ABC’s Sentient scandal: Sarah Ferguson’s documentary drama · The Front

• 0:04
  Speaker 1: From The Australian, here's what's on the front. I'm Claire Harvey.
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: It's Monday, August 31, 2026. Senior staff from a taxpayer-subsidised
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: visual art body reposted online messages celebrating the October 7
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: terror attacks and dismissing concerns for Jewish safety as a
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: reactionary Zionist dog whistle. That's an exclusive live now at theaustralian.com.au.
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: It's the story featuring its biggest news star the ABC
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: doesn't want you to know about. The drama over who
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: knew what and when about a documentary project. Our media diarist,
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: Steve Jackson, is revealing today a flagship radio program even
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: edited all mention of the issue out of a political interview.
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: Jacko's here in just a moment.
• 1:02
  Speaker 2: With rare access to the University of Washington's primate centre,
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: we found that lab workers there were struggling with the
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: consequences of what they do to monkeys.
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: Steve Jackson edits The Australian's Media Diary and he's been
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: covering the story of one of the ABC's top talents,
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: Sarah Ferguson, the host of ABC 730, being executive producer
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: of a documentary that everybody seemed to know about except
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: the ABC. It's a documentary called Sentient, directed by her husband,
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: Tony Jones. Jacko, I don't know if you've ever been
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: to the Sundance Film Festival, but I don't know if
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: I would want to get a bucket of popcorn and
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: watch monkeys being tortured on screen.
• 1:40
  Speaker 3: No, it's a hard watch.
• 1:41
  Speaker 4: And I've actually gone and seen the film. Look, it's
• 1:42
  Speaker 4: a difficult watch. I have been to Utah.
• 1:45
  Speaker 3: Great place.
• 1:46
  Speaker 4: I'm not sure if watching a vivisection film would be
• 1:49
  Speaker 4: moving it up a mark.
• 1:50
  Speaker 3: In the world.
• 1:51
  Speaker 4: But the problem we've had here is it's always the cover-up,
• 1:53
  Speaker 4: not the crime. No crime actually committed. But here's a documentary.
• 1:58
  Speaker 4: It's made by two of the ABC's biggest personalities. Obviously,
• 2:01
  Speaker 4: Tony Jones has moved on to a freelance independent filmmaking sector,
• 2:05
  Speaker 4: but still renowned for being the host of Q & A.
• 2:07
  Speaker 4: You've got the host of 7.30. And they're doing this
• 2:11
  Speaker 4: film that's got a lot of financing from Animals Australia
• 2:13
  Speaker 4: and a linked entity, Growing Kindness, that have funded it,
• 2:17
  Speaker 4: bankrolled it for $ 3 million. And Sarah Ferguson's name is
• 2:22
  Speaker 4: being used to apply for even more funding from Screen Australia.
• 2:25
  Speaker 4: And no one's being told at the ABC any of
• 2:27
  Speaker 4: this is happening. Right up until the moment, would you
• 2:29
  Speaker 4: believe it, Robert Redford's Sundance Film Festival comes up.
• 2:32
  Speaker 3: All of a sudden, there's a scramble.
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and it really was a scramble. On a Friday night,
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: Sarah Ferguson sent an email to the then boss of news,
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: Justin Stevens. He kicked it upstairs to Hugh Marks, who
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: was new as the ABC's editor-in-chief and managing director. And
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: pretty quickly, they came back with a, yeah, you can
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: be the executive producer of this film. The issue is, though,
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: of course, because this is a public organisation, the ABC,
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: questions are asked at forums like Senate Estimates that Hugh
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: Marks has to answer honestly. And when he was asked
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: about it, he was put in a really difficult situation,
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: wasn't he?
• 3:03
  Speaker 5: Look, this goes to the editorial decision-making by the ABC
• 3:08
  Speaker 5: and I want to raise the conflict of interest concerns
• 3:12
  Speaker 5: involving Ms Sarah Ferguson.
• 3:14
  Speaker 4: Well, this is the key point of it because I...
• 3:16
  Speaker 4: I think some people often aren't aware or forget that
• 3:20
  Speaker 4: giving evidence or sworn testimony before a Senate Estimates Committee
• 3:24
  Speaker 4: is the same as giving evidence in a court. Like
• 3:26
  Speaker 4: it's sworn testimony. You've got to tell the truth. No
• 3:28
  Speaker 4: suggestion he's not telling the truth, but he needs to
• 3:31
  Speaker 4: be furnished with the answers. He can't mislead. He can't
• 3:34
  Speaker 4: knowingly mislead. And we're not suggesting that's happened, but someone
• 3:38
  Speaker 4: has allowed the Estimates Committee to be misled because quite clearly,
• 3:42
  Speaker 4: given the documents that we've obtained under Freedom of Information...
• 3:46
  Speaker 4: Sarah Ferguson was involved. She was listed as a key
• 3:50
  Speaker 4: creative and that her attachment to the project was confirmed.
• 3:53
  Speaker 4: There's her CV, links to her work at the ABC.
• 3:56
  Speaker 4: So the suggestion that Hugh Marks made at Senate Estimates
• 4:00
  Speaker 4: that she was in no way playing an active role
• 4:02
  Speaker 4: in financing of the film appears on face value based
• 4:06
  Speaker 4: on those documents to be completely incorrect.
• 4:10
  Speaker 5: Miss Ferguson had no active role in the production of
• 4:12
  Speaker 5: the program, had no active role in the financing of
• 4:15
  Speaker 5: the program.
• 4:17
  Speaker 6: Films take a really long time to come to life
• 4:25
  Speaker 6: and along the way they can fall over at any
• 4:27
  Speaker 6: moment and probably 90% of them do.
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: This one, according to Tony Jones in an interview he
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: gave with The Guardian, arose out of a moment when
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: he was the foundation host of Q & A, back
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: in the glory days of Q & A. And the
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: animal rights activist Peter Singer said on an episode of
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: the show that in future we would look back at
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: live animal testing in laboratories. as an absolutely appalling thing,
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: a bit like how we consider slavery now. Tony Jones says,
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: you know, that idea then developed. They brought on board
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: one of Australia's most respected documentary filmmakers, Ivan O'Mahony. But
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: what was crucial in this one was Animals Australia. They
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: contributed most of the funding and the behind-the-scenes footage. That's
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: what they say on their website, Animals Australia. And Animals
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: Australia's connection to the ABC and to kind of the
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: mainstream media in Australia is very strong. They were behind
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: the live cattle Four Corners revelations in 2011 that ended
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: that trade temporarily.
• 5:21
  Speaker 6: It was a clear clash of cultures.
• 5:25
  Speaker 4: Animal activists versus cattle producers fighting for their livelihoods.
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: They were behind the greyhound racing story later on that
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: ended that industry temporarily.
• 5:35
  Speaker 4: But from next year, this iconic sport will be banned
• 5:38
  Speaker 4: in the state of New South Wales.
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: And they're behind, well, they would claim credit for the
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: imminent end of the live sheep export trade. The ministers
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: announced a four-person consultation panel to advise how to end
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: the trade. So Animals Australia, I mean, this is their business.
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: This is what they do.
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: They influence media.
• 5:59
  Speaker 4: Animals Australia are quite open about their advocacy work. They're
• 6:01
  Speaker 4: an activist group. They openly campaigned in support of the
• 6:05
  Speaker 4: Labor Party and the Greens at the last federal election
• 6:07
  Speaker 4: campaigned against the coalition. They are open and honest about
• 6:11
  Speaker 4: all that. The film, if You know, you're interested in this.
• 6:14
  Speaker 4: And even if you'd like to know more about live
• 6:17
  Speaker 4: testing on primates and monkeys, very educational. They have the
• 6:21
  Speaker 4: pros and cons. Obviously, testing on monkeys helped eradicate polio,
• 6:25
  Speaker 4: one of the great success stories of modern medicine. So
• 6:29
  Speaker 4: the film does show both pros and cons. Again, no
• 6:32
  Speaker 4: discrepancy there. It's just, again, the fact that for more
• 6:36
  Speaker 4: than two years, knowing the rules and And seeing them
• 6:40
  Speaker 4: applied to other people, we've seen Andrew Green not disclose
• 6:44
  Speaker 4: a junket to Europe to cover a naval shipyard submarine story.
• 6:48
  Speaker 4: He's effectively bustled out of the building because of that,
• 6:51
  Speaker 4: because he didn't disclose it. We know that the Mahmoud
• 6:54
  Speaker 4: Fazel non-disclosure of payments for a true crime broadcast he did.
• 6:58
  Speaker 4: That set off a series of events that in conjunction
• 7:02
  Speaker 4: with that led to him being let go by the ABC.
• 7:05
  Speaker 4: So I'm not saying the severity of this case is
• 7:07
  Speaker 4: the same, but definitely that fact of not disclosing stuff
• 7:11
  Speaker 4: to the employers at the ABC when it's there in
• 7:14
  Speaker 4: black and white, you need to do this, is a
• 7:17
  Speaker 4: glaring omission.
• 7:18
  Speaker 3: And quite frankly, it's a shocking one.
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: To be fair to Sarah Ferguson, though, this is her husband.
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: You know, if you're kicking around ideas at the dinner
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: table with your husband at home, and they've collaborated a
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: lot on projects since he left the ABC, including one
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: that won Sarah Ferguson at Walkley, the Revelation program, and
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: you don't know that this will ever get to life,
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: it's been rejected by Netflix and the ABC now for distribution.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: Was it not fair enough to think, well, yes, I
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: am an executive producer. Yes, my name might be attached
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: to the funding documents for this to Screen Australia. I'm
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: trying to be devil's advocate here, but it might never
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: come off anyway. I don't really need to bother everybody
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: at the ABC about this yet.
• 7:54
  Speaker 4: Well, I think initially, and this was the argument that
• 7:56
  Speaker 4: Hugh Marks and the editorial director of the ABC, Gavin Fang,
• 7:59
  Speaker 4: made to the Senate when they appeared in May, was, look,
• 8:03
  Speaker 4: she was just tossing around ideas.
• 8:04
  Speaker 3: She was tossing around as an idea for a project,
• 8:07
  Speaker 3: obviously that She's not really involved. Why disclose it? Like
• 8:10
  Speaker 3: she talked some ideas with her husband.
• 8:11
  Speaker 4: Yeah, great. None of that's a drama. It's at the
• 8:14
  Speaker 4: point when she seeks the funding that she is playing
• 8:18
  Speaker 4: a critical role because her prestige as one of the
• 8:22
  Speaker 4: ABC's leading personalities is part of the application.
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: Tony Jones said that Netflix had rejected it and that
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: they told him that their audience didn't really want to
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: see animals getting harmed. The ABC has rejected it. You
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: revealed that in The Australian. Does the ABC have an
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: obligation to air this kind of thing, though? I mean,
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: it's in a very limited release now in sort of
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: arthouse cinemas. That's probably as far as it's going to
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: go in cinemas. If this journalism is important and this
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: really is the new slavery, does the ABC as a
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: public broadcaster have an obligation to bring this to Australians?
• 8:57
  Speaker 3: Well, it's a difficult one.
• 8:58
  Speaker 4: Usually, and we're not even sure if this is the
• 9:01
  Speaker 4: case as yet, but usually we see that when a
• 9:05
  Speaker 4: film like this is developed, they get what is called
• 9:07
  Speaker 4: an anchor partner in Australia. So they go to the ABC,
• 9:11
  Speaker 4: they go to SBS, Channel 7, Channel 9, increasingly less
• 9:15
  Speaker 4: now because they're less willing. And let's face it, they
• 9:17
  Speaker 4: wouldn't have bankrolled this at the outset because it's not
• 9:20
  Speaker 4: a ratings winner. So you would think that they would
• 9:23
  Speaker 4: acquire it and help finance it. We don't know if
• 9:26
  Speaker 4: at this stage, if they did approach the ABC, it
• 9:28
  Speaker 4: appears not. But if they had paid to help fund it, yeah, definitely.
• 9:32
  Speaker 4: And which will be what we see with Silenced with
• 9:34
  Speaker 4: the Brittany Higgins film or the film Brittany was involved
• 9:37
  Speaker 4: in is they will air that because they helped stump
• 9:40
  Speaker 4: up cash to produce it. So while they didn't make
• 9:43
  Speaker 4: any contribution to the film, the question is, given, as
• 9:46
  Speaker 4: you say, it is an important subject matter and the
• 9:50
  Speaker 4: host of 7.30 is the executive producer and Tony Jones
• 9:54
  Speaker 4: as the writer and director, you would think there would
• 9:57
  Speaker 4: be a fair argument to go, hey, this should be
• 9:59
  Speaker 4: on our schedule.
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: Especially when they have a number of obligations, but they're
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: not bound like commercial broadcasters are to ratings. They can
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: afford to air something that's a very slow burn that
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: is public interest journalism, really. Like, no one else can
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: afford to air this.
• 10:13
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and it is a good film for what it is. Yeah,
• 10:16
  Speaker 3: you're right.
• 10:16
  Speaker 4: Are you going to get the kids around and break
• 10:18
  Speaker 4: out the bag of strawberry and creams and sit there
• 10:21
  Speaker 4: and have a.
• 10:22
  Speaker 3: good I'll watch it. No, probably not.
• 10:24
  Speaker 4: It's not one for all the family because it is heartbreaking. Look,
• 10:28
  Speaker 4: were I to talk about it just with you, is
• 10:30
  Speaker 4: it worth watching? Yeah, definitely go and watch it. Not
• 10:32
  Speaker 4: a date night film, but definitely go and watch it.
• 10:35
  Speaker 4: Should it be shown on the ABC? You would have
• 10:36
  Speaker 4: thought yes, except you wonder if now the concerns around
• 10:42
  Speaker 4: the funding are has had some impact because we first
• 10:45
  Speaker 4: found out about them earlier in the years, raised its
• 10:47
  Speaker 4: Senate estimates, and all of a sudden the answer's no.
• 10:49
  Speaker 4: We're not going to film it. They got told just
• 10:53
  Speaker 4: over a week ago now on a Friday that it
• 10:55
  Speaker 4: wasn't going to be shown on the ABC. And you
• 10:58
  Speaker 4: just wonder if that controversy... is a reason that people
• 11:02
  Speaker 4: who watch the ABC will now miss out on seeing this.
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: So is that a little punishment? It's like, well, we're
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: not going to show you doco.
• 11:06
  Speaker 3: I think it is not so much a punishment.
• 11:09
  Speaker 4: I think it would be a way of avoiding further questions,
• 11:12
  Speaker 4: knowing that, hey, if we show this now, there's already
• 11:15
  Speaker 4: questions over the financing of it. Is this going to
• 11:18
  Speaker 4: create more controversy than it's worth? And I'm not saying
• 11:21
  Speaker 4: that's the reason.
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: Why?
• 11:23
  Speaker 4: Because I've asked what the reason is and they won't
• 11:24
  Speaker 4: tell me. We went to them and we said, hey,
• 11:27
  Speaker 4: why aren't you going to show this? And the answer
• 11:29
  Speaker 4: was no comment. We're not going to tell you why
• 11:30
  Speaker 4: we're not going to show it.
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: Coming up, the mention that was edited out of a
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: radio interview. Music One of the senators who must keep
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: ABC executives awake at night when she's preparing to grill
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: them at estimates is Sarah Henderson, the Liberal senator.
• 12:01
  Speaker 5: I have to say, Mr Marks, it's not acceptable to
• 12:03
  Speaker 5: defend this in any way on the basis that they
• 12:06
  Speaker 5: were his personal views.
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: She grilled Hugh Marks about this and she later appeared
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: on the ABC's Radio National Breakfast program with Sally Sarra
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: initially to talk about the gambling reforms that the coalition
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: had worked on. Did Sally Sarra ask her about this?
• 12:22
  Speaker 4: Well, yeah, it's quite interesting what happened earlier this month.
• 12:25
  Speaker 4: She went on that program on Radio National. And intriguingly,
• 12:29
  Speaker 4: the thing about Senator Henderson is she has, and everyone
• 12:33
  Speaker 4: talks about, she's got this strong interest in the ABC. Obviously,
• 12:36
  Speaker 4: she used to work at the ABC. She won a
• 12:38
  Speaker 4: Walkley Award there for her coverage of the Port Arthur massacre.
• 12:41
  Speaker 4: And then, you know, she's gone on to be a
• 12:42
  Speaker 4: Liberal Senator, still maintains this fierce interest. But she goes
• 12:46
  Speaker 4: on with Sally Sarra. And Sally is the one who
• 12:49
  Speaker 4: intriguingly brings up Mahmoud Fazal.
• 12:52
  Speaker 7: ABC has withdrawn several stories produced by a former Four
• 12:57
  Speaker 7: Corners reporter, Mahmoud Fazal, due to concerns about accuracy and sources.
• 13:03
  Speaker 7: Are you satisfied with the way that the ABC is
• 13:06
  Speaker 7: responding to this or should more heads roll in your view?
• 13:10
  Speaker 4: So there's still an investigation going on. So it's quite
• 13:13
  Speaker 4: a interesting insight into the ABC that they're probably happy
• 13:17
  Speaker 4: that this investigation is going on and they themselves are
• 13:20
  Speaker 4: jumping to some conclusions.
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: Or that Sally Sarra is just a good journalist, you know.
• 13:23
  Speaker 7: Well, yes.
• 13:24
  Speaker 3: And I think that is definitely the case.
• 13:26
  Speaker 4: And for someone to be asking serious questions like that
• 13:29
  Speaker 4: about their own employer, it's one of the good things
• 13:31
  Speaker 4: we see about the ABC is they have got those safeguards. Yeah,
• 13:34
  Speaker 4: and they've got those safeguards to do it and knowing
• 13:36
  Speaker 4: that they are allowed to because a lot of that
• 13:39
  Speaker 4: coverage of Faisal has been driven by Linton Besser at
• 13:42
  Speaker 4: Media Watch. So they have got that ability to sort
• 13:45
  Speaker 4: of reflect on themselves, which is great. And then Sarah
• 13:48
  Speaker 4: Henderson goes, yeah, well, you know, here are my feelings
• 13:50
  Speaker 4: on that. It's a very trying time for Four Corners
• 13:53
  Speaker 4: and the respectability of the show and how it's been
• 13:56
  Speaker 4: placed in its trust with the public.
• 13:59
  Speaker 5: Four Corners is a highly credentialed program, much, much admired
• 14:05
  Speaker 5: over many, many years. But this is a shocking event.
• 14:08
  Speaker 5: Shocking scandal. Heads must roll. Who was responsible for all this?
• 14:12
  Speaker 3: And then she starts rattling off issues.
• 14:15
  Speaker 4: And she goes, well, obviously there's the Mahmood Fazal and,
• 14:18
  Speaker 4: you know, all the dramas with that, and we're going
• 14:19
  Speaker 4: to know more about that in the weeks and months
• 14:21
  Speaker 4: ahead as the investigation comes to a close. Then she mentions,
• 14:24
  Speaker 4: you know, the Gina Reinhart race around the world satire
• 14:28
  Speaker 4: has also been not great. And then she mentions Heston
• 14:31
  Speaker 4: Russell and remember the fake gunshots.
• 14:33
  Speaker 3: Then she mentions.
• 14:35
  Speaker 4: Oh, and also there's this drama with Sarah Ferguson and,
• 14:37
  Speaker 4: you know, this movie and no one knowing how it's
• 14:39
  Speaker 4: been funded. And then it goes live and it's on
• 14:42
  Speaker 4: the internet. And there you go. Mahmood Fazal.
• 14:44
  Speaker 3: It's in there. The Gina Reinhart scandal. It's in there.
• 14:47
  Speaker 3: Heston Russell. Gunshots. It's in there.
• 14:49
  Speaker 4: They're all in there. It gets to the Sarah Ferguson thing.
• 14:51
  Speaker 4: Very clear, obvious edit.
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: Boom.
• 14:54
  Speaker 3: Gone.
• 14:56
  Speaker 5: The Gina Reinhart scandal. The fake gunshot scandal involving Heston Russell,
• 15:01
  Speaker 5: where he was falsely accused of being a war criminal,
• 15:04
  Speaker 5: it's not good enough.
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: Now, we all know things need to be edited for brevity.
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: If she was waffling on and on for 20 minutes
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: about it, you can understand why this was cut, what
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: actually was cut out.
• 15:14
  Speaker 4: So what she said, and Claire, I hope you don't
• 15:16
  Speaker 4: mind me having a read for this, because it is
• 15:18
  Speaker 4: not particularly long, but for my mind, obviously a little
• 15:22
  Speaker 4: bit too long to memorise, but We've had Sarah Ferguson
• 15:25
  Speaker 4: caught up in a scandal involving being the EP of
• 15:28
  Speaker 4: a documentary funded by animal rights activist when, of course,
• 15:31
  Speaker 4: she was the host of the 7.30 program. So I
• 15:35
  Speaker 4: know you're saying edited for brevity, but would you say
• 15:37
  Speaker 4: out of a seven-odd long minute, somehow those 12 seconds
• 15:42
  Speaker 4: are the ones cut for time?
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: Maybe it's just a coincidence.
• 15:46
  Speaker 3: And if I'm cut for time out of this, I'll
• 15:47
  Speaker 3: know why.
• 15:48
  Speaker 6: Thanks, Jacko.
• 15:49
  Speaker 3: Thank you.
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: The ABC said that edit to the Sarah Henderson interview
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: was made on legal advice. Steve Jackson is The Australian's
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: media diary editor. You can read this week's diary right
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: now at theaustralian.com.au slash media.