The short version
- One Nation has excluded reporters from the ABC and Guardian Australia from multiple press conferences, including one where leader Warren Pickering admitted to illegal drug use.
- Party director James Ashby compared the relationship with public broadcasters to domestic violence, drawing sharp condemnation from media executives and press freedom advocates.
- Critics argue the exclusions hinder voter access to information and represent an attempt to control the narrative and avoid accountability.
A growing conflict between One Nation and major Australian news organizations has escalated after the party barred reporters from the ABC and Guardian Australia from attending press conferences. The exclusion occurred during a media event in Victoria where state leader Warren Pickering made admissions regarding illegal drug use and drink driving. Journalists from both outlets were escorted to the venue by hotel staff but were subsequently asked to leave by One Nation’s national director, James Ashby, after identifying their affiliations. Security personnel then removed them from the premises.
This incident follows a pattern of restricted access for these specific newsrooms. In August, Pauline Hanson prevented ABC, Guardian, and Age reporters from attending an announcement of Victorian election candidates. At that time, Hanson criticized the ABC for lacking fairness in its coverage while welcoming representatives from Rebel News, a right-wing outlet led by Avi Yemini. The Australian, which had previously broken stories involving Pickering, was not barred from that specific event but faced denial of entry to a separate One Nation gathering in Sale, Victoria, the previous month.
The rationale provided by party officials for these exclusions has drawn significant criticism. James Ashby appeared on the Today show and described the media organizations as morally bankrupt or corrupt. He further characterized One Nation’s interaction with the ABC as resembling a domestic violence relationship, stating that the broadcaster consistently beats them when they enter the room. These comments were widely condemned as inappropriate and offensive, particularly by those representing victim-survivors of such abuse.
Hugh Marks, managing director of the ABC, argued that barring these outlets undermines the public’s right to information about political parties seeking office. He stated that the actions appear designed to avoid scrutiny, control media narratives, and influence voter perception. Marks called for an immediate reversal of the ban, emphasizing that such restrictions hinder legitimate journalistic inquiry into nominees running for public positions.
David Munk, editor of Guardian Australia, supported the ABC’s stance and condemned Ashby’s remarks. He noted that while political coverage often involves conflict, the ongoing refusal to admit reporters from these organizations marks a concerning departure from standard practice. Munk emphasized that journalism plays a vital role in maintaining democracy by allowing journalists to question politicians so the public receives accurate and trusted information.
The tension between One Nation and these news outlets has roots in previous reporting. The Guardian has extensively covered the party’s internal finances, governance issues, and political relationships, including substantial financial backing from Gina Rinehart, Australia’s wealthiest individual. Tensions flared after a National Press Club address in June when Hanson attacked senior correspondent Sarah Martin for asking questions about her daughter, Lee Hanson, who works as an adviser to senator Sean Bell despite residing in Tasmania.
Exclusions have also occurred during electoral events. In May, both the Guardian and ABC were barred from One Nation’s election night party following the Farrer byelection, where Liberal member Sussan Ley was defeated by One Nation’s David Farley. Local ABC reporters faced similar rejection at a media event held before that byelection. These incidents suggest a systematic effort to limit access for critical voices during key political moments.
Press freedom advocates have warned of broader democratic implications. Peter Greste, executive director of the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, stated that democracy depends on the press’s ability to interrogate politicians on behalf of voters. He argued that Pickering’s decision to ban media outlets rather than face scrutiny directly threatens the democratic system and the public’s right to know what is happening in government.
The situation highlights a deepening rift between One Nation and mainstream media institutions. While the party seeks to control its messaging through selective access, news organizations argue this approach deprives voters of essential information. The debate underscores concerns about transparency and accountability in political communication, with critics viewing the bans as an attempt to shield party leaders from difficult questions.
As the conflict continues, the question remains whether One Nation will reverse its policy or maintain its stance on media access. The responses from ABC and Guardian leadership indicate a firm position against censorship, regardless of the political context. The outcome may set a precedent for how political parties interact with the press in future elections and public engagements.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Guardian World↗ABC and the Guardian call on One Nation to reverse media ban amid censorship concerns
