It seems 9News Queensland is adding opinion to its mix now. On Wednesday night, a report by state political reporter Reece DAlessandro — about Queensland Rail industrial action — sounded very much like an editorial.
Nine often uses this set-up, where the reporter sits at the desk and speaks to the anchors, Melissa Downes and Joel Dry, but I can’t recall it being used for commentary rather than a straight exchange of facts.
So, I checked the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice, where I found:
3.4 Impartiality
3.4.1 In broadcasting a news Program, a Licensee must: a) present news fairly and impartially; b) clearly distinguish the reporting of factual material from commentary and analysis.
I think that the opinion part of the conversation in this instance could have been better signposted.
Is this going to be a regular thing?
Incidentally, under the code, current affairs programs “are not required to be impartial and may take a particular stance on issues”.
Footnote: Does anyone else remember there being an editorial segment at the end of a Brisbane television news bulletin in the late 1970s or early 1980s? I think it was on Channel 0 (now 10) and it was short-lived, but I can’t recall who presented it.
Making it by faking it
A recent comment on social media has got me thinking. And, since I’ve been fighting off some sort of lurgy for the past few days, that’s been a bit more difficult than usual.
(Yes, I thought I’d get the disclaimer for potential fuzzy-headiness in early this time.)
The commenter referred to a Brisbane broadcaster — who I won’t name, because this allegation may be unfounded — as someone who “impersonates a Sly Presenter”.
Google tells us:
A “sly presenter” is someone who delivers information, hosts a show, or makes a pitch in a crafty, cunning, or wily manner. This type of presenter often hides their true intentions, using deception or cleverness to manipulate the audience’s perception or to “pull one over” on them…
While a traditional presenter is expected to be a confident and trustworthy face of a program, a “sly” presenter uses similar skills in communication to serve a more hidden, self-serving, or manipulative goal.
The extended definition notes that such a person does not disclose their real intentions, uses an insincere tone and can appear “charming on the surface while being cynical or manipulative underneath”.
Now all this made me think back a few decades when I first encountered a radio personality whose real-life and on-air personas were vastly different. The bloke who was shouting abuse and saying outrageous and sometimes untruthful things on air was quietly intelligent and as charming as pie outside the studio.
At the time, this particular presenter had been accused of “saying things he didn’t really mean” simply to garner attention and ratings. With great success, I should add. But also at a cost, to himself and to others.
I’ve seen it many times since, and I’ve seen big names in the media work the room, glad-handing someone before slagging them off to the next person they meet.
Now in some circles, that’s regarded as a valuable trick of the trade. Nothing works quite like insincerity.
More recently, I heard an interview with a popular British comedian who was at pains to say that his on-stage persona was a grossly exaggerated version of his true self — a character he plays who just happens to have the same name.
It’s a schtick and it can be harmless: I’m a bit of a lad, or I’m terribly posh, or I’m clumsy, or I’m a bit thick, or whatever.
But what happens when that invented persona takes over or is taken seriously?
Former Triple M presenter Marty Sheargold, who was sacked after making comments about endometriosis and women’s sport, recently claimed he was playing a character at the time. (He also appeared to double down on some of what he said.)
And Kyle Sandilands has said in his court case against ARN that was performing his contracted role as a “robust character” presenting a “deliberately provocative” program.
But is it necessary to say offensive or divisive things on the public airwaves during the school run? I’d suggest that both Sheargold and Sandilands have the talent to engage and entertain an audience without going down this lazy path.
One of radio guru Valerie Geller’s golden rules (sorry, “top three principles of becoming a more powerful communicator”) is that you need to tell the truth. And, I suggest, that is especially relevant when talking about who you are and what you think.
If you are radio or TV presenter or you host a podcast, my message is:
Call it as you see it, by all means. But don’t pretend to have a certain point of view simply because it will push the buttons of some people in your audience. You have the means to shift opinion and stir anger. With great power comes great responsibility. Use it wisely; to inform and entertain, not inflame.
Mister Brisbane is free to read but you if you really like it, you
can buy me a coffee or take out a paid subscription.
Reportedly…
In radio, it’s all about timing. And time wasn’t on ARN’s side when it was compiling its Annual Report for 2025, which carries a release date of March 31, 2026.
In the chairman’s letter, Hamish McLennan acknowledges that “Following the lodgement of the Group’s accounts, legal proceedings relating to the Kyle & Jackie O show commenced.” But, later on in the report, there’s this:
The report also reveals that Kyle Sandilands and Jackie Henderson hold shares in the company, meaning that to a small degree, they are suing themselves.
P.S.
Memo to the live and local radio newsreader who got their geography mixed up on Wednesday morning: Woolowin is a Brisbane suburb; Woolloomooloo is in Sydney.
Update: Further to my most recent blog, based on widespread reports published elsewhere, it seems the Super Radio Network is not for sale.