The Claim
“Criticised the ABC for not 'advancing Australia's broad and enduring interests in the Asian region', without actually accusing the ABC of any specific wrongdoing or poor judgement.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
TRUE - Foreign Minister Julie Bishop did publicly criticize the ABC in January 2014 regarding its fulfilment of obligations to promote Australian interests in Asia.
On January 2, 2014, Bishop was quoted in The Australian newspaper (News Corp) expressing concerns about the ABC-run Australia Network service: "I also have concerns about the quality of the programming and whether it is meeting the goal of promoting Australia's interests overseas... It is meant to be a tool of public diplomacy and I am concerned by the level of negative feedback I receive from overseas" [1].
In a subsequent ABC Radio interview, Bishop stated: "I am concerned given the number of complaints... that while the content and program selection is obviously up to the ABC, that it's not actually meeting its charter and code of practice" [2].
The criticism followed a letter from DFAT's first assistant secretary Justin Brown, which indicated the department was monitoring ABC performance to ensure the service "becomes a more effective vehicle for advancing Australia's broad and enduring interests in the Asian region" [1].
Missing Context
The claim omits several critical pieces of context:
Specific Service, Not General ABC: Bishop was referring specifically to the "Australia Network" - a $223 million, 10-year government-funded overseas television broadcasting service contract awarded to the ABC in 2011, not the ABC's domestic operations generally [1][2]. This service was created explicitly for "soft diplomacy" to improve understanding of Australia in the Asia-Pacific region.
Contractual Obligations: The ABC had contractual obligations under the DFAT funding agreement to "foster the improved understanding of Australia's global role and to increase awareness of the links between Australia and the Asian region" and to "project a positive and contemporary image of Australia and promote a clear understanding of government policies" [1]. DFAT paid the ABC $21.9 million annually for this service [1].
Origins of the Criticism: Bishop's concerns were prompted by complaints from conservative blogger and former radio host Michael Smith, who wrote to DFAT in November 2013 complaining about specific ABC stories he viewed as negative toward the government, including coverage of asylum seeker briefings and climate change negotiations [1].
Tender Process Controversy: The context includes the controversial 2011 tender process where the Gillard Labor government awarded the contract to the ABC after leaks suggested the tender evaluation panel had recommended Sky News (part-owned by News Corp). The Australian National Audit Office found Labor's handling of the tender "presented the Australian government in a poor light" [1][3]. Bishop specifically referenced this history, saying Labor had "corrupted the tender process" [1].
Part of Broader Pattern: The criticism came amid a series of Coalition attacks on the ABC in late 2013/early 2014. In December 2013, Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull had accused the ABC of "error of judgment" for collaborating with Guardian Australia on stories about Australian spying on Indonesian officials [1].
Outcome: The Australia Network was ultimately axed in the May 2014 budget, with the service ceasing operations on September 28, 2014 [4].
Source Credibility Assessment
The Guardian (the original source):
The Guardian is widely assessed by media bias monitoring organizations as having a left-leaning editorial stance:
- Ad Fontes Media rates The Guardian as "Skews Left" in bias and "Reliable, Analysis/Fact Reporting" in reliability [5]
- AllSides rates The Guardian as "Lean Left" based on blind bias surveys of 1,331 people across the political spectrum [6]
- Factually.co notes The Guardian is "widely regarded by media watchdogs as left-leaning rather than neutral" [7]
The Guardian is generally considered reliable for factual reporting, though its editorial stance and story selection may reflect progressive viewpoints. The article in question was written by Daniel Hurst, a Guardian Australia political correspondent at the time, and accurately reported Bishop's comments with appropriate context.
Secondary sources used in this analysis:
- The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH): Generally rated as center-left, part of Nine Entertainment, mainstream reputable Australian news source
- The Australian: News Corp-owned, generally considered conservative-leaning, was the original publisher of Bishop's comments
- Michael Smith's blog: Conservative opinion blog, not a mainstream news source, cited as the origin of complaints
Labor Comparison
Did Labor governments also criticize or pressure the ABC?
Yes - both Labor and Coalition governments have a long history of tension with and attempts to influence the ABC.
According to research from the University of Melbourne published in The Conversation: "History tells us that no matter which side of politics - Labor or Coalition - is in power, there is no respite for the ABC from incipient government hostility" [8].
Specific Labor examples:
The 1975 Dismissal: The ABC's coverage of the dismissal of Gough Whitlam's Labor government was highly controversial, with accusations of bias from both sides. The National Archives of Australia documents the intense political pressure on the ABC during this period [9].
Tender Process Manipulation (2011): As noted above, the Gillard Labor government's handling of the Australia Network tender process - including changing the decision-maker from DFAT secretary to Communications Minister Stephen Conroy after leaks favored Sky News - was found by the Australian National Audit Office to have "presented the Australian government in a poor light" and raised "perceptions of a conflict of interest" given Conroy's portfolio responsibilities for the ABC [1][3].
Ongoing tensions: Multiple academic analyses confirm that both parties have historically sought to influence ABC coverage when in government, with complaints about perceived bias being common from whichever party is in power.
Comparison: While this specific incident involved Coalition criticism of the ABC, the broader pattern of government-ABC tension is bipartisan. Labor governments have also been criticized for attempting to manipulate ABC processes and coverage.
Balanced Perspective
The full story:
Julie Bishop's criticism of the ABC was not an arbitrary attack but occurred within a specific contractual and political context. The Australia Network was a government-funded soft diplomacy tool with explicit contractual obligations to promote Australian interests. Bishop's concerns - raised following complaints from a conservative blogger - focused on whether the ABC was fulfilling these contractual obligations under the $223 million agreement.
The criticism was part of a broader pattern of Coalition dissatisfaction with ABC coverage in late 2013, particularly following ABC's collaboration with Guardian Australia on stories about Australian intelligence operations in Indonesia. The timing (January 2014) and context suggest political motivation, particularly given the tender process controversy under Labor.
However, the ABC's editorial independence is statutorily protected. DFAT's response to the complaints explicitly noted that "the department has no authority to direct the ABC in relation to program selection; editorial matters remain the ABC's responsibility in accordance with the ABC charter and the codes of practice" [1].
Key context: This type of government criticism of the ABC is not unique to the Coalition. Both major parties have historically sought to pressure or influence the national broadcaster when they perceive coverage as unfavorable. The Australia Network's subsequent axing in the 2014 budget suggests the criticism may have been a prelude to cutting the service rather than genuine concern about charter compliance.
PARTIALLY TRUE
6.0
out of 10
The claim accurately reports that Julie Bishop criticized the ABC for not advancing Australian interests in Asia. However, the framing as "without actually accusing the ABC of any specific wrongdoing or poor judgement" omits crucial context. Bishop was referring to a specific contractual service (Australia Network) with explicit obligations to promote Australian interests, and she specifically raised concerns about the ABC not meeting its "charter and code of practice" [2]. The criticism was not groundless - it was connected to a government-funded service with defined diplomatic objectives. That said, the criticism arose from a politically charged context involving conservative complaints and followed a pattern of Coalition attacks on the ABC, ultimately leading to the service's cancellation.
Final Score
6.0
OUT OF 10
PARTIALLY TRUE
The claim accurately reports that Julie Bishop criticized the ABC for not advancing Australian interests in Asia. However, the framing as "without actually accusing the ABC of any specific wrongdoing or poor judgement" omits crucial context. Bishop was referring to a specific contractual service (Australia Network) with explicit obligations to promote Australian interests, and she specifically raised concerns about the ABC not meeting its "charter and code of practice" [2]. The criticism was not groundless - it was connected to a government-funded service with defined diplomatic objectives. That said, the criticism arose from a politically charged context involving conservative complaints and followed a pattern of Coalition attacks on the ABC, ultimately leading to the service's cancellation.
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (9)
-
1
Julie Bishop: ABC failing its mandate to promote Australian interests overseas
Foreign affairs minister says she has 'concerns about the quality of the programming' on the government-funded Australia Network service
the Guardian -
2
Bishop concerned about regional network
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop says she's receiving complaints about the ABC's Australia Network, and is considering whether it's fulfilling its charter.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
3PDF
Australia Network tender process audit report
Anao Gov • PDF Document -
4
ABC may lose Australia Network
Stripping the ABC of its Australia Network would be seen as a significant concession to Rupert Murdoch and critics of public broadcasting
the Guardian -
5
The Guardian Bias and Reliability
Ad Fontes Media rates The Guardian, a British news website that reaches 110 million in the U.S., as skews left in terms of bias and as most reliable in …
Ad Fontes Media -
6
The Guardian Media Bias
Allsides
-
7
Is the Guardian biased
Factually
-
8
Australian governments have a long history of trying to manipulate the ABC – and it's unlikely to stop now
Findanexpert Unimelb Edu
-
9
Inciting the country to riot? The ABC and the Dismissal 1975
Naa Gov
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.