By John Q. Hosedrinker The Federal Court ruled the ABC unlawfully terminated Antoinette Lattouf’s employment in December 2023, citing her political opinions regarding the war in Gaza as a factor. Justice Rangiah found the broadcaster contravened the Fair Work Act by dismissing Lattouf, awarding her $70,000 in compensation. The case originated from a social media post Lattouf shared, and despite the ABC’s claim that her contract simply ended, the court determined she was terminated. This case has garnered significant attention within the media industry, raising questions about editorial independence and employment protections.
Read the original article here
Federal Court finds ABC acted improperly in firing Antoinette Lattouf, and honestly, it’s a pretty clear-cut case, at least based on what we’ve gathered. It seems like Antoinette Lattouf, a presenter for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), found herself in hot water after retweeting a post from Human Rights Watch about the ongoing conflict in Gaza. This post, specifically, addressed the deaths of civilians.
Now, the crux of the issue seems to stem from a local Jewish lobby group, who took issue with Lattouf’s apparent stance on the situation, which they viewed as being “Pro-Palestine.” They then allegedly pressured the ABC management, and, well, the management appears to have caved pretty quickly, ultimately leading to Lattouf’s firing.
The court’s finding of unfair dismissal isn’t exactly surprising. After all, the ABC itself had previously cited and referenced the very same Human Rights Watch report that Lattouf retweeted. If the broadcaster itself had deemed it suitable content for their reporting, it’s difficult to see how retweeting the same report could constitute a breach of company policy, wouldn’t you agree? The case, as it stands, has garnered significant attention across the industry, sparking conversations about editorial independence, the protections afforded to employees, and, importantly, the responsibilities of publicly funded media organizations.
It’s important to clarify that this wasn’t, at least on the surface, about antisemitism. It centered on her sharing a Human Rights Watch report that highlighted the use of starvation as a weapon of war by Israel. And, let’s be honest, many people agree that Israel is, in fact, using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza. As a result of this ruling, Lattouf has been awarded $70,000 in compensation for the non-economic impact of her firing.
It does make you wonder about the ABC’s priorities, doesn’t it? It’s interesting how expressing concern for civilians, regardless of their nationality or background, is now apparently considered a controversial stance. The fact is that the judge also mentioned that Lattouf’s actions were “ill-advised and inconsiderate of her employer.” However, the overarching theme is that she lost her job because of pressure from an outside group.
This brings up an interesting point about lobby groups. While they have the right to express their opinions and even send complaints, a public broadcaster’s management really should have the spine to ignore such pressures.
What really complicates the matter is the alleged involvement of legal threats from this particular lobby group. Reports indicate that lawyers representing the group threatened legal action against the ABC if Lattouf wasn’t fired. This goes beyond a simple expression of disapproval; it’s a direct attempt to influence employment decisions through intimidation.
It begs the question: what about the IDF attacks on hospitals, homes, universities, and civilians since October 7th? Were those actions, somehow, justified? The ambulance convoy that was attacked, the aid stations where hundreds were killed. Were all those, according to some, Hamas?
The situation escalated beyond mere complaints. The lobby group allegedly used legal threats to get their way, and that fundamentally changed the dynamic. Legal threats can certainly be a tool for shaping policy, but in this case, they seemed to be used to effectively extort the ABC into complying with demands. Now, if you look into the internal communications of this group, it gets even more disturbing.
Allegedly, the Zionist lawyers involved actively strategized to have Lattouf fired. They allegedly planned to bombard the ABC with complaints, even admitting internally that there were no legitimate grounds for legal action. These conversations allegedly reveal that the lawyers were in direct contact with senior ABC executives, receiving rapid responses and apparently even from high-level figures such as the chair of the board.
It’s a worrying sign of the times. It raises questions about the influence of special interest groups and their ability to silence voices they disagree with, even within a public broadcasting service. The whole situation highlights a concerning trend: the willingness to cave to pressure and silence dissenting opinions, even when those opinions are rooted in human rights concerns and are supported by reputable organizations like Human Rights Watch.