I’ve been calling out media bias for years now, and I’ll say it plainly: the ABC, funded by Australian taxpayers, still manages to outdo everyone else. It’s in a league of its own.

For a long time, plenty of people clung to the idea that the ABC could be reformed from within, saying calls by people like myself to defund the ABC were too drastic. I’ve never changed my position, though I did hope things might improve over time, especially with Kim Williams, who happens to be my uncle through marriage, as Chairperson.

But let’s be honest, the legitimate concerns raised for years have not disappeared. They’ve simply been ignored. The encouraging development is that more moderate voices are now recognising the same pattern of bias and misinformation, and the ABC’s continued reluctance to fix it.

The ABC has spent years covering for Islamists.

Now, after the worst ISLAMIC TERROR attack in Australian history, they’re still doing it.

Defund the ABC. pic.twitter.com/KSXwiNPKPO

— Avi Yemini (@OzraeliAvi) December 18, 2025

A newly released 58-page independent report submitted as evidence into the Royal Commission into Antisemitism has raised serious concerns about the ABC’s coverage of the Israel-Gaza conflict. This is not about a few isolated errors and spelling mistakes; it alleges a broader pattern of misleading framing and biased reporting funded by taxpayer dollars. It's substantial and detailed, with a detailed breakdown of how the ABC engaged in these practices. 

One of the most disturbing claims is the repeated use of images of children with genetic conditions or unrelated illnesses being presented as starvation victims linked to the conflict. In many cases, critics argue the surrounding context was either missing or inadequate, creating a misleading impression for Australian audiences.

An independent research group that investigated ABC's coverage of the Israel-Gaza conflict compiled the findings into a 58-page report and submitted it to the Royal Commission.

Below are just a few examples from the report that demonstrates:
- How ABC used sick children with… pic.twitter.com/kmCnTHvpTX

— Australian Jewish Association (@AustralianJA) May 10, 2026

Many of these concerns were being raised in real time regarding sourcing, context, and emotional framing, yet the same style of coverage continued regardless, with the ABC even doubling down.

In July 2025 alone, the ABC published around 100 articles focused on famine-related narratives, often accompanied by highly emotive imagery and selective framing. In another case highlighted by the report, a Palestinian boy was reported as killed by Israeli fire, despite information reportedly available from the child’s mother indicating he had not been shot and was still alive at the time of publication.

Should Australians really accept this as the standard of reporting being produced by a $1.2 billion taxpayer-funded broadcaster? I don't think so.

I watched Kim Williams address these types of allegations publicly on a recent podcast, where he emphatically dismissed claims of systemic bias and challenged critics to provide direct evidence. But the evidence is not abstract; it is found in patterns of framing, story selection, and tone that repeat across coverage over time. In this instance, an entire report has been produced, yet even that has not prompted any apparent reconsideration of practices.

NEW AND EXCLUSIVE: ABC Chair Kim Williams on X vs Bluesky: “Fish where the fish are.” He says he read about the decision to leave X while eating his weeties! and responds candidly to our questions about it. Full interview drops Sunday. @bj_stansfield @swegen31 pic.twitter.com/zivJoC6ai0

— PollPodTas (@PollPositionPod) May 21, 2026

At the same time, he also strongly defends the ABC’s public funding, describing the $1.2 billion budget as “worth it and then some”, and even suggesting it should be doubled. Meanwhile, everyday Australians are dealing with a cost-of-living crisis while being fed, in my opinion, increasingly one-sided and biased reporting of little value.

Go Ad Free

The culture in the room isn't any better, it is clear to many that the ideological spectrum inside the ABC is narrow, leaning heavily toward left-wing progressive viewpoints. Conservative or non-mainstream perspectives are often underrepresented or dismissed as fringe. This is reflected in coverage, and also in the views expressed by individual staff members on social media. Combined, the pattern raises legitimate questions about the broadcaster’s ability to adhere to ethical reporting standards.

The ABC’s recent choice to scale back on X and prioritise Bluesky, even though X continues to be a primary platform for real-time breaking news in Australia, is further evidence of this trend. ABC Chair Kim Williams himself admitted X is one of the fastest information sources compared to Bluesky’s tiny audience here. Is the ABC deliberately narrowing its reach to avoid uncomfortable viewpoints and retreat into safer left-leaning spaces?

One of the most troubling aspects for many Australians is the growing ideological slant in the ABC’s children’s content, promoted in the name of inclusion. Many view this as crossing into outright propaganda, all paid for by taxpayers. Although ABC management is well aware of these concerns, they continue with little to no serious response. This has led many to question who the broadcaster actually serves.

Kim may have let the mask unknowingly slip when he criticised Pauline Hanson for restricting ABC access, arguing that public officials should not be able to pick and choose who questions them. That principle is sound in theory, but where was the ABC when I was removed from press conferences involving Daniel Andrews during COVID? They were either silent or, in some cases, supportive of it. Many Australians have noticed that scrutiny does not always flow evenly in the other direction. They pick their targets, and right now One Nation and Pauline Hanson have been selected as ideological opponents.

The issue goes far beyond any single story or segment. It is the result of a deeply ingrained institutional culture that accepts and normalises bias as standard practice. Its roots are interconnected with a wider ecosystem of biased media outlets. I was personally subjected to a coordinated smear campaign by the ABC and The Guardian, who worked in tandem to discredit me for challenging their journalism. Portions of this coordination were later revealed through FOI requests, although significant parts remain heavily redacted.

I know Kim Williams personally through family connections and have no doubt about his good intentions. However, good intentions do not guarantee good results, nor should they shield any public institution from scrutiny. I have previously shared my concerns with him directly, including honest and sometimes tough feedback. In any case, my voice is far from alone, thousands of Australians raise these issues every year.

Australians deserve journalists, not activists.
Truth. Accuracy. Accountability. 🇦🇺

📍 ABC Southbank Centre
📅 Tuesday 2 June
⏰ 12pm–1pm#JournalistsNotActivists #TruthMatters #MediaAccountability #Australia #StandTogether @abcnews pic.twitter.com/5Alqd54gUg

— Never Again Is Now Australia (@NeverAgainANZ) May 26, 2026

In response to these ongoing concerns being ignored, a protest against ABC bias is scheduled for Tuesday the 2nd of June outside the ABC Southbank Centre in Melbourne. Organised by Allies for a Strong Australia, the event flyer highlights issues around taxpayer funding, impartiality, and reporting standards.

Many Australians no longer see the ABC as a neutral reflector of the national conversation. Instead, they feel the public broadcaster has lost their trust.

If you are fed up, take action and sign our Defund the ABC petition below. The more we speak out, the less they can ignore us.